Very interesting development.. really hope this helps speed up this process
"Looks like Canada may agree to pay upfront for US Customs plaza to move delayed NITC bridge project ahead. See upcoming #freep story"
https://twitter.com/JGallagherFreep/...83845561511937
One step forward, one mile back:
Lansing — Senate Republicans launched another attack on Gov. Rick Snyder’s new bridge to Canada Tuesday by prohibiting the state from purchasing any land for it as part of a $3.8-billion transportation budget for 2015.
From The Detroit News: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...#ixzz30yLeF0pL
Matty must be paying his goons a pretty penny.
As you may know I'm Canadian, but if the US Feds won`t pony up a lousy 250 million to get a 2nd span built then all this Homeland Security stuff is a joke.
They won't and it is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 401don
It's embarrassing is what it is. The proposed new bridge is an international crossing, not a State or Detroit crossing. A foreign government [[and I love Canada) has to pony up to make it happen? Shameful.
It is absurd. It is one of the more basic functions of government. The bridge may be controversial, but having proper border screening should not be. And it is a comparative bargain for the feds anyway. Get half of a multi-billion dollar bridge project for the cost of screening people and cargo on one side.
Mikey, you know better than that. Governments are not rational entities. They are creatures of politics. That's why we need a constitution and a judiciary -- to keep the politicians from making each and every decision with politics in mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeyinBrooklyn
And 'bargain'. Irrelevant word to most government.
We Canadians shouldn't be paying for the US customs plaza. I say let the bridge get built without a US customs plaza and then LET'S GO SHOPPING!
As a American I'm ashamed to admit it, but Canadians should have never offered to pay for the whole bridge.Quote:
Originally Posted by Király
Instead they should have bought 50 mill in TV adds here, it would have saved them a lot of money and headache.
don't build it, we have enough bridges and tunnels
... So has Duggan taken a public position on the development of a second bridge?
I doubt that this will get addressed one way or another even in a few years. Horrible.
Let them build our new hockey arena too...after all, its their sport.:rolleyes:
Sounds good to me. I actually thought that this could be a good test pilot project to have US Customs on the Candian side and the Canadian Customs on the US side. That way people are screened BEFORE crossing the bridge. What's the point of screening for "terrorists" if they are on one of the potential targets before they are screened....Duh....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Király
It should be remembered that the Canadians are issuing and guaranteeing the bonds. If all goes as planned, the revenue from the bridge is to pay off the bonds. Canadian taxpayers hopefully will not lose a loonie on the venture.
As for state Senate Republicans blocking necessary land acquisition: they are being stupid. Snyder lacks much pull with them because they are activist, ideological conservatives [[many of them anyway). Snyder isn't. He arrives at his policies through what he views as practical, not due to a sense of right or wrong. Hope they get it worked out.
Well shit, while they're at it, lets have Canada bulldoze every abandoned building in Detroit, widen 94 and 75, and renovate MCS to incorporate a new high speed rail hub to Chicago.
I find it incredibly embarrassing that the USA, the richest most powerful country in the world, can't pay for a customs plaza for an international crossing, especially when Canada is fronting the rest of it. What a joke...
Especially Pappageorge...Quote:
Originally Posted by animatedmartian
If it is indeed at 35% of capacity, then why did Matty want to build a second span?Quote:
But Sen. John Pappageorge, the Troy Republican who supports the restrictions on land acquisition, said the privately owned Ambassador Bridge is operating at 35 percent of capacity while carrying the bulk of trade goods between the United States and Canada across the Detroit River.
From The Detroit News: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...#ixzz313Ne6pzY
Let me start by saying I am no fan of Moroun or his tactics.
But I do believe that this whole thing about Canada paying for the new bridge is because over the years the Canadians screwed up and allowed the approach roads to the Ambassador Bridge from the 401 to be developed as residential. Remember, the bridge was built in 1929. There was very little on the Canadian side that time. And truck traffic was nothing compared to today. IMO - the Canadians are trying to CYA years of mistakes on their side of the border.
Better question: Why would he spend $30 mil in advertising to try to stop the State from building theirs? EVEN BETTER QUESTION: Why is he STILL pursuing his second span erection? And there's no revenue to be had from a newer, bigger, bridge. What bull-poop.Quote:
Originally Posted by downtownguy
It's still a pretty bad deal for Michigan.
If Canada agrees to pay for Michigan's debt on the Blue Water twin-spanning, and Michigan's debt on the Ambassador gateway reconstruction, then I support this. Otherwise this will hurt Michigan's ability to repay those bonds.
Both the Blue Water and Ambassador are seeing traffic well below capacity, and Michigan taxpayers are on the hook if traffic drops more on those two bridges. Currently the Blue Water debt is so bad that current traffic will never allow for repayment.
The Ambassador is a four lane bridge constructed in 1929. It is also the busiest trade crossing between the US and Canada. How is it possibly operating below capacity?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bham1982
I don't doubt your points about the Blue Water, though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Khorasaurus
Ambassador bridge is not very busy. It has 14,000 vehicle crossings a day; 10,000 trucks and 4,000 cars. By comparison to the Champlain bridge in Montreal with 159,000 daily crossings, it is less than 1/10th the traffic usage of our busiest regional bridge. But again, it is an international bridge and folks dont need the hassle of border crossings and toll.
I dont even know what the ultimate need for another bridge is btwn Detroit and Windsor really since there are four other spans crossing Montreal's south shore suburbs and they together hold maybe 300,000 cars a day...
I think it has more to do with an Ontario make work project IMO.
You're probably right. The Ambassador Bridge is operating way below capacity and a new bridge would be a losing proposition for Michigan. That's way Matty Maroun is pursuing his second span tooth and nail. He's in too high a tax bracket and is looking for some way to shed some of his billions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bham1982
I refuse to vote republican for anything in Washington, and I'm very damn close to doing the same for the state.Quote:
Originally Posted by ferndalien
That's very frustrating that folks that preach competition are trying to protect an evil man's monopoly at the expense of public interest.
It's not that they're Republicans. Snyder is a Republican and he's the number one proponent of the bridge. It's that they're corrupt and Maroun shrewdly paid off Republicans because it's easy for them to pretend their opposition has something to do with government spending [[even though the bridge will cost Michigan taxpayers basically nothing...)Quote:
Originally Posted by 48307
Also note that the Democratic White House/USDOT are dragging their feet on this project, which makes no sense whatsoever.
It makes sense because a Republican is spearheading the effort much to the dismay of his own MI Party.Quote:
Originally Posted by Khorasaurus
I've said before that any bridge blockage in the political process in DC, Lansing, Detroit, Windsor or Ottawa is not Matty Maroun's "fault." If politicians are elected who obey him, it is exclusively the fault of the voters who elect them, and generally reelect them. Matty might be distasteful to many people, but he is not actually running the government. He has a right to lobby for his interests [[he's hardly the only person or business or group with money throwing millions around to lobby on their behalf). What's worse than Matty lobbying to block a bridge? Teachers' unions throwing money at keeping poor black kids in terrible Detroit public schools. Less controversial, but far more evil. I am just saying that anger at MM is misdirected. If you hate Matty for blocking the bridge, I am curious as to whether you showed up to heckle the President or Vice President on their recent Detroit visits. They didn't fight to fund the bridge, and are not exactly leading the charge to fund the customs plaza. And they have more actual power on the issue the cranky 90 year old.
If the Federal and State governments won't pay then we could have a County Property tax pay for this. It would only take about a 2.5 mil tax or about $180 per year per household to pay for this.
I think also we should have a write in ballot for the SMART August tax and cross out 1 mil and write 3 mil.
I'm very sure we can afford to pay more for SMART, the bridge, a water authority and other regional projects for maybe say another $500 per year more in taxes. And ya know $500 per year more in new taxes is cheap and I'm sure no one will protest this enough to get these jobs done.
Just imagine a great bus system, a new bridge and bringing back Detroit for such a small price.
TGG, I don't see county voters supporting that idea at all. Many homeowners are loathe to increase their taxes at all, let alone to have one county foot the bill for something benefiting 2 large and affluent countries. Also, potentially problematic, is the fact that the powers/responsibilites for Michigan municipalities are limited by state law; although I can't say for sure, I would be surprised if those powers could be read to include building a federal customs plaza at an international bridge.
There is a strong correlation between this and the SMART Property Tax.
That correlation is job growth and the strong majority of Wayne County voters wanting, willing, able and by necessity by means of force to raise property taxes for this and restoring public bus service.
Most of us know Property taxes in Wayne, Oakland and Macomb counties are low and cheap when we consider how much good services we get.So, we vote YES whenever we get the chance to raise them.
Please support the NEW campaign to raise the SMART tax to 3.0 mil by a write in vote. Cross out the 1 and write in 3. We did this for the mayor and YES we can do this for SMART, no matter that a NO vote caps funds. I'm very sure this will work to get the buses AND the bridge by freeing up more state money to get more federal grants and also raise local and sales taxes to secure more grants. We don't as a majority necessarily have to even enforce federal laws as proven by the popular SMART property tax.
You're right. Those teachers are sooooooooooooooooooooooo overpaid and underworked!Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeyinBrooklyn
I just counted the number of daily crossings for the five bridges that span the St Lawrence river between Montreal and the south shore suburbs and eventually toward the USof A.
Not counting the Victoria Bridge, circa 1860 [[ I couldnt find statistics for that one.)
Champlain bridge; 159,000
Mercier Bridge; 75,000
JCartier Bridge; 115,000
Lafontaine Tunnel; 131,000 for a grand total of 480,000 daily crossings vs 26,000 for the Detroit Windsor tunnel and the Ambassador. So let Ontario build youse a new bridge.
You are looking at the wrong statistics and arguing the wrong point. This isn't about the amount of commuter traffic, it's about trade volume. There is a big difference between processing cars through an international border crossing and customs facilities, and passing commercial semi trucks through.Quote:
Originally Posted by canuck
The Ambassador Bridge is the busiest international border crossing in North America in terms of trade volume: more than 25 percent of all merchandise trade between the United States and Canada crosses the bridge.
The number of vehicles that pass over any other border crossing between the US and Canada doesn't mean shit, because there is no other border crossing between the US and Canada that even comes close to the volume of goods that come across the Ambassador bridge.
The new bridge has nothing to do with accommodating more vehicle crossings from Detroit to Windsor, and everything to do with the flow of commercial trade between the US and Canada.
The bridge has nothing to do with either issue. There's tons of capacity for commercial trucks right now [[too much capacity, in fact). It's a Canadian jobs and economic growth project for Windsor, the weakest metropolitan economy in Canada.Quote:
Originally Posted by erikd
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bham1982
Yep, that's what it is as far as i can see.
Surely, downtownguy, you realize that teacher's unions [[like most organizations with more than 2 members) are highly political groups whose agenda is not the same as individual teachers. Most teachers teach because they want to make a difference in kid's lives, share the love of learning, and work hard at doing those things. Those are the goals of individual teachers. Teacher's unions lobby strenuously for power and money in a gigantic industry. Radical change to the education industry- which is needed in places like Detroit- threaten the power and money of those unions. The interests of teachers and their unions often do not overlap. Of course, I would argue, that is true of most unions. Unions may have helped end sweat shops; but, they also stifle innovation, creativity and flexibility.Quote:
Originally Posted by downtownguy
Really? So if there is actually too much current capacity, and this is just some kind of Canadian jobs program, then why is Matty Maroun trying to build a twin bridge right next to the Ambassador?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bham1982
The argument that this is some kind of unnecessary Canadian government project doesn't hold water because the owner of the current bridge also supports building a new one. He just doesn't want anybody else getting a piece of his monopoly.