BOMBSHELL: M1 Rail won't provide $100 million for DDOT's current Woodward rail plan

**BShea** · July-15-11, 11:53 AM

Originally Posted by Novine

"You'd be very surprised by who is airing complaints. And your snarky statement implies you their complaints about DDOT's plan and its handling of this project are without merit. Interesting, because even pro-DDOT/DTOG backers don't agree with you on that one."

I wasn't commenting on the validity of the complaints. I was commenting on the gossip rag nature of the delivery of the complaints where some of the city's most-connected people get a mouthpiece in the media to air their complaints without having their names attached to them. This is typical of the garbage we get out of Washington DC where much of the press corps is nothing more than a filter for the rich and powerful to launch attacks while keeping their hands clean. Are you a journalist or a gossip rag columnist?

So if the complaints are valid, where are you coming up with "gossip" and "garbage?"

I assume you're sophisticated enough to grasp that reporters cannot sit on news just because sources refuse to let their names be used. That's not how this business works, nor has it ever been. And reporters are trusted to use their judgment when using background / unnamed sources. I'm not into giving a soapbox to anyone. This is a legitimate story -- the complaints and impasse are very real -- regardless of whether names are used or not. No one is disputing the schism between M1 and DDOT. This isn't gossip, and DDOT was given the space to respond. Good grief.

No one came to be to air complaints, FYI.

"God Damn that Woodward and Bernstein for printing that unnamed gossip-garbage in that rag Washington Post!"

**BShea** · July-15-11, 11:59 AM

Another thing to keep in mind is that M1 internally has never been a unified front. Some members are mostly pleased with things, some are not at all. If there was a loss of M1 funding -- all of which has been soft commitments and more theoretically other than Krege's $35m -- I suspect it might be just a portion. Maybe some of the $3m individual station commitments don't happen. That money might be something that the feds could let slide under the 60-40 funding formula ratio for News States. It feels like the Obama Administration/FTA REALLY want this project to happen. It's a political feather in Obama's cap heading into an election.

**bailey** · July-15-11, 12:11 PM

Originally Posted by BShea

So if the complaints are valid, where are you coming up with "gossip" and "garbage?"

I assume you're sophisticated enough to grasp that reporters cannot sit on news just because sources refuse to let their names be used. That's not how this business works, nor has it ever been. And reporters are trusted to use their judgment when using background / unnamed sources. I'm not into giving a soapbox to anyone. This is a legitimate story -- the complaints and impasse are very real -- regardless of whether names are used or not. No one is disputing the schism between M1 and DDOT. This isn't gossip, and DDOT was given the space to respond. Good grief.

No one came to be to air complaints, FYI.

"God Damn that Woodward and Bernstein for printing that unnamed gossip-garbage in that rag Washington Post!"

Ok.. but you do recognize the fatigue for those who don't have anonymous movers and shakers calling us up to bitch right? It smacks of dishonesty to read one day the deal is blown to then a week later hear the same people walk it back and attribute it to a "miscommunication" and it's really the complete opposite.

While the media cant "sit on the news" it'd be nice if it did until there was some vetting of the statements of "those that wish not to go on record" that their statement is actually a valid one..and not their own free lance opinion.

It's tired and frustrating to hear "Source A...who wishes to remain anonymous but was in the meeting says Mr. B stormed out of the meeting and on his way out burned a pile of hundreds on the desk screaming "that's the last dime you'll see from us you lackwit morons!" Then kicked a puppy." To only then hear from Mr. B the next day that it was "a spirited and honest discussion and no one left in a huff, burned anything, or kicked puppies. We're all in this together and on the same page"[[pause..smile for camera....give concerned look).

I mean if a media outlet is going to cite a source that is basically taking a flame thrower to the project, then back it up. Because the continual backroom, anonymous accusations that wilt under the light of day are just exhausting and it all begins to sound like unsubstantiated gossip and not a legit inside perspective. .

**BShea** · July-15-11, 12:48 PM

No one is calling me up to air complaints. None of those involved on any side want public scrutiny on this project's behind-the-scenes machinations. They want to operate in secrecy.

Yet I could have sworn I saw a big photo of Rip Rapson in the nation's largest newspaper complaining about the mayor and making dark hints about Kresge's funding for Woodward light rail unless the city played ball with him, his foundation and its board.

But I guess that was just sensationalizing on the part of the WSJ, by quoting him directly and all?

Then he doesn't like the story, so he tried to back off. James Harrison is doing the same thing this week.

Rapson's comments -- which were pretty hard to misinterpret, as were Bing's direct quotes complaining about the foundations -- and with Gilbert's very clear statements on side/center running rail opened the floodgates, but only because reporters were prying it out of people.

I mean if a media outlet is going to cite a source that is basically taking a flame thrower to the project, then back it up. Because the continual backroom, anonymous accusations that wilt under the light of day are just exhausting and it all begins to sound like unsubstantiated gossip and not a legit inside perspective. .

Is there some suggestion that there is no internal bickering? Did the WSJ and Crain's just make up everything to "sell papers" or something? Everyone -- well, almost everyone ... not Ilitch or Gilbert ... is rushing to say how much they support the mayor and DDOT and light rail. Of course they're going to say that. No one wants to be branded as the apostate that killed this plan. But that doesn't mean it's not in in funding jeopardy.

If readers prefer to believe blue-skies statements from people under pressure rather than the digging done by reporters, and basically accuse the media of making up something out of whole cloth for some unexplained reason [[or be the mouthpiece of rogue disgruntled elements) that's fine. All I can tell you is that I've talked with people with direct knowledge of what's going on [[from multiple sides), and it's as I reported. If they've all subsequently solves their differences, awesome.

**Detroitnerd** · July-15-11, 01:00 PM

Bill, may we have your permission to take your reporting and anything you post here with a grain of salt? Or is it an insult to your professionalism to believe there may be more at play than your omniscience grants us a view of?

**jsmyers** · July-15-11, 01:30 PM

Originally Posted by BShea

It feels like the Obama Administration/FTA REALLY want this project to happen. It's a political feather in Obama's cap heading into an election.

I think that you are right that the FTA really wants to see this happen, but I don't think it has much to do Obama. I'd be surprised if he knew more than the basic information about the project.

Its got more to do with Detroit being the largest metro area without any type of urban transit [[the DPM doesn't count on its own). I would also think that the FTA want to see the project go forward because it has of the way a successful project of this type will look in a decade:

-public/private partnership
-redevelopment of distressed community
-successful transit in the heart of the American auto industry
-new transit investment in "rust-belt" city

It is therefore an attractive model for other cities and projects, and dispels a number of anti-transit [[or at least anti-rail-transit) myths.

I think it is not only cynical, but also short-sighted to claim that Obama wants this to get elected by Michigan in 2012 [[not that BShea wrote this). Michigan did just elect a republican who ran on a moderate platform in a election, but otherwise, it has been a pretty safe D for presidential politics. the last few years of the auto industry politics have probably only helped him. I don't think he has to worry about Michigan, and if he did, I'm not so sure that this project would motivate swing voters.

**Novine** · July-15-11, 01:34 PM

"No one is calling me up to air complaints. None of those involved on any side want public scrutiny on this project's behind-the-scenes machinations. They want to operate in secrecy."

Well, if you're able to equate gossipmongering among competing parties in this dispute with breaking open a criminal enterprise by a sitting President of the United States, I suppose you may actually believe this. If these people didn't want their dirty laundry aired in the press, they wouldn't be blathering to the press. These people aren't dumb. They know they can use the press to spin their version of events and the press is more than willing to serve as their mouthpiece while allowing the complainers to keep their hands clean. I guess you can call this newsworthy but I know that a lot of people get turned off by this constant stream of insider gossip masquerading as news.

**bailey** · July-15-11, 01:35 PM

Originally Posted by BShea

If readers prefer to believe blue-skies statements from people under pressure rather than the digging done by reporters, and basically accuse the media of making up something out of whole cloth for some unexplained reason [[or be the mouthpiece of rogue disgruntled elements) that's fine. All I can tell you is that I've talked with people with direct knowledge of what's going on [[from multiple sides), and it's as I reported. If they've all subsequently solves their differences, awesome.

I'm not aiming this at you directly...more of a general statement. but I.. for one...don't want a "blue skies statement" in any way shape or form. I want the folks that make one statement one day only to retract and walk it back the next get called out for their behavior..in bold print and all caps and not be allowed to walk back incendiary comments. Hang them around their neck.

What seems to happen is what we get the very "blue sky" crap you've objected to. Oh...he didn't really mean that WSJ article...look he's walked that back...they are only having an issue with marginal things. Everyone is working together. let bygones be bygones and all that....

Is the thing on or off.... that is all I want to know. Seems to be a pretty simple question as we're going on ..what? 2 years late? I mean weren't we supposed to be riding this tram already? And when it's finally dead and blown to shit, I want names. I want on the record statement on who pulled their money and why they did it. not some anonymous vague implication that a few of this group didn't like one or two of that group.

If that waste of space [[and a lot of it) Joanne Waston is standing in every meeting blathering on about being disrespected ... and that is what causes the private money to walk. REPORT IT.

If the Macedonian Parking Don won't go along because he's not getting his cut... REPORT IT.

If DDOT f'ed it all up by dictating take it or leave it terms. REPORT IT.

I know that will never happen though because if it did the reporter would never get another story and anyone that ever touched it would be fired from whatever outlet named names.

What we'll get in the end is a lot of anonymous finger pointing, some vague reasons about leadership failure and structural deficiencies, and the same over wrought discussions about suburb vs city, private v public squabbling instead of a public discussion about the morons that run this place and the asinine things they do to ensure we never get any f'ing thing done.

**Jason** · July-15-11, 02:52 PM

idk, I think the coverage on the light rail has been pretty informative.

Also, I don't like the bad news, but I think just that there are these kinds of disagreements, and even going to the WSJ, and all that kind of stuff, it shows that it's a real project that people are battling over. I think these are the kinds of problems that happen in reality. I think it shows how far the project has come and how much people have accepted the reality of a light rail project.

**jsmyers** · July-15-11, 03:10 PM

Good point Jason

**professorscott** · July-16-11, 10:31 AM

I also think the coverage of the current situation has been conflicting because the people involved are probably conflicted within themselves. The M1 Rail folks originally planned to implement something themselves; now they can't, and the project they envisioned has to be implemented by an organization in which they don't have a great deal of faith.

They don't like how they were, according to many reports, marginalized by DDOT, but on the other hand they know how important a successful project would be to the City. They also probably fret over what people will think about them if they "renege" on their "pledge" [[see below), especially those whose businesses rely on a positive public image.

By the way I put "renege" and "pledge" in quotation marks because I have never seen any evidence that any of the M1 Rail people ever promised money to fund a DDOT project. Of course I have no knowledge of the actual form of any such pledge, but it's hard to imagine any of them would have envisioned the project governance in the form it's in.

Some of the friction might be over the fact that the current plan has center-running track in something like two-thirds of the M1 Rail section of the project, but I suspect more of it has to do with governance and with the M1 Rail folks worrying about whether DDOT can successfully implement a project.

So with all of this churning and turmoil going on, if you accept all of my conjectures, in the minds and hearts of the M1 Rail folks, it is not in the least surprising that one newspaper reports one situation and another newspaper reports a completely different situation. As Tevye says to the bickering villagers in Fiddler on the Roof, "you are right... and you are also right!" ...and when a third villager points out that since the two disagree, they can't both be right, Tevye replies, "...you know... you're right!"

**dtowncitylover** · July-16-11, 11:28 AM

Originally Posted by professorscott

I also think the coverage of the current situation has been conflicting because the people involved are probably conflicted within themselves. The M1 Rail folks originally planned to implement something themselves; now they can't, and the project they envisioned has to be implemented by an organization in which they don't have a great deal of faith.

I think it was a bit naive of them to think that they could build something on their own. These businesses and organizations are not in the businesses of building and operating a tram system. They don't know how to do that, they're not Siemens or Bombardier. I know DDOT isn't the best of public transit authorities, but they're the ones we got in the city, and M1 Rail should have been working with them from day 1.

**casscorridor** · July-16-11, 02:09 PM

Originally Posted by dtowncitylover

I think it was a bit naive of them to think that they could build something on their own. These businesses and organizations are not in the businesses of building and operating a tram system. They don't know how to do that, they're not Siemens or Bombardier. I know DDOT isn't the best of public transit authorities, but they're the ones we got in the city, and M1 Rail should have been working with them from day 1.

Exactly. They were told they could not build their own line, they had to go through the new starts process. That is why they merged the plan with DOT. They were never going to build their own streetcar.

Also, I'm pretty sure the federal government looked at the private money as an actual pledge. This is how we we are able to get the federal backing.

So if these private backers want anything, they should go along with the prescribed federal process, because they legally cannot build their own line.

They are endangering the idea they supposedly champion, of rail on Woodward Ave. DDOT has serious operational issues, but it is the only organization at this time capable of sponsoring the project, until a regional authority is created. And those issues are in large degree attributable to state and federal policies that have stripped public transit operators of funds [[in addition to policies that have stripped Detroit of its population).

So if the private backers want to do something productive, they should lobby the state government to pass a regional authority bill, and a source of funding new rail transit construction and maintenance. It may take more time than we have to get the federal money. I'm pretty sure the deadline is in September. To deny the funds, even without a regional authority, may very well collapse the whole project.

One more thing to keep in mind is that maybe the federal advisers coming in will help the project along, and ensure success. This is what I've been hearing, but we'll just have to wait and see.

**j to the jeremy** · July-16-11, 02:53 PM

Originally Posted by casscorridor

Exactly. They were told they could not build their own line, they had to go through the new starts process. That is why they merged the plan with DOT. They were never going to build their own streetcar.

Also, I'm pretty sure the federal government looked at the private money as an actual pledge. This is how we we are able to get the federal backing.

So if these private backers want anything, they should go along with the prescribed federal process, because they legally cannot build their own line.

They are endangering the idea they supposedly champion, of rail on Woodward Ave. DDOT has serious operational issues, but it is the only organization at this time capable of sponsoring the project, until a regional authority is created. And those issues are in large degree attributable to state and federal policies that have stripped public transit operators of funds [[in addition to policies that have stripped Detroit of its population).

So if the private backers want to do something productive, they should lobby the state government to pass a regional authority bill, and a source of funding new rail transit construction and maintenance. It may take more time than we have to get the federal money. I'm pretty sure the deadline is in September. To deny the funds, even without a regional authority, may very well collapse the whole project.

One more thing to keep in mind is that maybe the federal advisers coming in will help the project along, and ensure success. This is what I've been hearing, but we'll just have to wait and see.

This. I really hope the feds force L. Brooks and the DDOT unionsto get on the RTA bandwagon

**corktownyuppie** · July-16-11, 04:43 PM

Originally Posted by professorscott

If you haven't read the editorial in Crain's, go read it. I agree with it.

The private investors never originally intended to give $100 million to DDOT; I doubt they have much faith in DDOT at all, and DDOT has done very little in the past couple decades to provide anyone with much confidence. Look at the number of bus trips that don't actually run on any given day, or the fiasco shortly after the Rosa Parks Transit Center opened, just for instance, or the fact that DDOT has cut more than half its scheduled service just since 2003 [[not that it actually operates the schedule it publishes) and has cut more than 95% of the schedule service it operated at its peak after World War II.

The investors wanted the original, short M1 Rail like to be the initial link in a future regional system; they never intended for it to be a stand-alone project like what the People Mover became. I think it is fair to say the overall vision included that a regional transit authority would be able to operate all the transit in the region, including the M1 Rail line and its eventual extensions into Oakland County.

I doubt the current struggle has very much to do with the engineering detail of where the trains switch from center-of-street to near-curb alignment. I think it has more to do with the idea, as expressed in the editorial, that DDOT simply expected the private consortium to cough up money no matter what happened, and did not seriously work with them to create a shared or compromise vision.

Many people on these threads have expressed the idea that the private consortium is somehow legally bound to provide funding. That is absolutely untrue. The investors originally committed to fund an initial, short line that would be built with private funds and operated by who knows who, according to a particular vision and strategy. They agreed to cooperate with DDOT because it turned out that was the only way their investment dollars could be used to leverage the second phase of the system. However, so far as I can tell, to DDOT, "cooperate" just means "pay, and keep your mouth shut".

Detroit will never succeed as a City until it learns to get off its high horse and actually try to earnestly work with the people who are trying to do things to help it. But I don't think Detroit has the ability, or even the inclination, to do that.

I'm unfamiliar with the org structure of the city of Detroit. If I wanted to write a letter to the elected official who oversees DDOT in order to express my support for keeping the M-1 investors happy, to whom would I send it?

**Fnemecek** · July-17-11, 10:05 AM

Originally Posted by corktownyuppie

I'm unfamiliar with the org structure of the city of Detroit. If I wanted to write a letter to the elected official who oversees DDOT in order to express my support for keeping the M-1 investors happy, to whom would I send it?

Mayor Dave Bing.

http://www.ci.detroit.mi.us/Departme...ttheMayor.aspx

**Autoracks** · July-17-11, 05:34 PM

100 million dollars is too much money to just hand over in good faith. And private consortiums of millionaires dont typically amass money like that by making poor business decisions. Im surprised it took this long to come to this. I never put much faith in this project in the first place

**cramerro** · July-18-11, 10:41 AM

Originally Posted by casscorridor

Exactly. They were told they could not build their own line, they had to go through the new starts process. That is why they merged the plan with DOT. They were never going to build their own streetcar. ...

... So if these private backers want anything, they should go along with the prescribed federal process, because they legally cannot build their own line.

First, they were told by the COD that they did not want them to build thier own line - that they had to join forces and go through the new starts process - because the COD wanted thier line on Woodward [[and wanted to use the private money to help pay for their line). If they pay for it, get approval to use the ROW [[see next point), and get an exception from the NEPA process [[which they could if it was in the existing ROW), they can certainly build it.

Second [[and along the same idea), there is no law that says a private company cannot build a light rail line. In fact, in the 1800's and earlier 1900's, private companies built the streetcars and operated them for profit. It's been a while since then, but there is nothing illegal about what M-1 was proposing. Unfortunately for them, and for us, they were one critical step short of putting the shovel in the ground: they needed the OK from the city to use the right-of-way. That's where the city's sputtering DTOGS and fear of no control kicked in, and 4 years later we're still hoping this might still happen in one form or another.

Third, related to other posts, of course the M1 Rail aren't in the business of building rail lines. They are, however in business - which means they know how to weigh the costs and benefits of making an investment, have an idea of what they think is worth spending money on, and most of all, they know when to pay people who are experienced in something to do it for them.

Just as the COD City Council aren't rail engineers, they rely on the experts to do the heavy lifting. IMHO, this argument for why M-1 shouldn't do a rail is null. Either way, here's to hoping we can just get something built before I retire [[I've got about 25 years to go).

As a brief aside, the latest article with Rip Rapson [[I think it was the one covering the presser on the fed staff help) had a few quotes where he said that the WSJ article was supposed to be about all philanthropic efforts in Detroit [[not just Kresge and/or the light rail), and that his interview and quotes were from 3 months ago. Assuming that's all true, couldn't have asked for poorer timing for that to come out than the day after the FTA/COD announcement. I wonder if WSJ did that on purpose?

**BShea** · July-18-11, 10:51 AM

Again, I see plenty of evidence of the thinking on here that goes, "These guys aren't engineers, so they should just shut up and hand over money. Trust whatever DDOT says and don't deviate from the process."

Keep in mind that these guys assembled this financing for their own project. It wasn't just that FTA mandated them to do it only through New Starts. There's no law requiring that. It was because the bureaucracy -- the giant self-licking ice cream cone -- rose up and engulfed the project in the usual red tape and such. DTOGs, through political pressure and overwhelming bureacratic-ness, engulfed it and made it too much of a head ache to do purely privately -- even tho the state of Michigan had set up the authority to run the M1 system and finance its operations. M1 was a helluva lot farther along in its smaller demonstration line than DDOT is.

**ghettopalmetto** · July-18-11, 11:43 AM

Originally Posted by BShea

Again, I see plenty of evidence of the thinking on here that goes, "These guys aren't engineers, so they should just shut up and hand over money. Trust whatever DDOT says and don't deviate from the process."

Keep in mind that these guys assembled this financing for their own project. It wasn't just that FTA mandated them to do it only through New Starts. There's no law requiring that. It was because the bureaucracy -- the giant self-licking ice cream cone -- rose up and engulfed the project in the usual red tape and such. DTOGs, through political pressure and overwhelming bureacratic-ness, engulfed it and made it too much of a head ache to do purely privately -- even tho the state of Michigan had set up the authority to run the M1 system and finance its operations. M1 was a helluva lot farther along in its smaller demonstration line than DDOT is.

Why are you blaming DDOT and DTOGS? If you're going to receive federal money, you have to follow federal New Starts guidelines. Without the federal money [[which is a greater sum than the private money), the project doesn't happen. You can't pony up 20% and then whine and bitch that you don't get your way.

As noted above, the private interests could put shovels in the ground tomorrow for a rail line--IF they wanted to. Greater Cleveland RTA did something similar with its Waterfront Line in the 1990s, because they had foregone federal money. The problem is, the private interests are going to get nothing more than a 3-mile loop if they go it on their own, and you bet your ass they know it.

**Warrenite84** · July-18-11, 02:02 PM

Whatever happened to a performance in good faith by the M1 team? When they agreed to link their project to the DTOGS process, [[to leverage their $ to build the line to 8 Mile), couldn't they prove their committment to the process by setting up an escrow-type account or trust with the stipulation that the $ remained inaccessible until an RTA and funding for operations are enacted?

It seems like a contract to me to deliver X when one commits to link their $ to Y. Were there any stipulations to the agreement that could limit damages if they reneg? The city has been out some $ too to follow the federal guidelines process so we cannot say that they shirked their duty concerning this as far as I know...

I also have to agree with some others here, I don't prefer to be toyed with. Either up or down, yes or no, like sooo many trumpted plans we hear that die quietly.

I would prefer the M1 team come out of this in a positive light along with the general public.

**BShea** · July-21-11, 09:11 AM

I'm doing a free online live chat at 2 p.m. today [[Thursday, July 21) to answers as best I can questions about the Woodward light rail situation.

You can participate by clicking here.

Thanks.

**cramerro** · July-21-11, 09:52 AM

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

Why are you blaming DDOT and DTOGS? If you're going to receive federal money, you have to follow federal New Starts guidelines. Without the federal money [[which is a greater sum than the private money), the project doesn't happen. You can't pony up 20% and then whine and bitch that you don't get your way.

As noted above, the private interests could put shovels in the ground tomorrow for a rail line--IF they wanted to. Greater Cleveland RTA did something similar with its Waterfront Line in the 1990s, because they had foregone federal money. The problem is, the private interests are going to get nothing more than a 3-mile loop if they go it on their own, and you bet your ass they know it.

They aren't "ponying up 20%"... even if that is the eventual share of the entire line. They ponied up 100%, including donating high level staff to serve the M1 project throughout the planning and fundraising stages. They joined forces becaue they thought it was the right thing to do - not beacuse they thought thier initial line was junk. And, yes, 'all' they would get is the line between Hart Plaza and New Center, which links a LOT of activity centers and major city institutions in the smallest length possible, ceratinly meeting most of the goals of the people putting up $$$ to help people move to Mid. Once ridership was proven, getting money for more rail from the Feds by DDOT, DARTA, or whomever would be easier... it's that first project that is often the most difficult to get help with. That's why parlaying the M1 money to leverage the Federal dollars makes so much sense, if not for the bottomless mud pit that is the city to muck even a slam-dunk - like private money to build half of the entire woodward line - up so badly.

**ghettopalmetto** · July-21-11, 10:09 AM

Cramerro, there are so many flaws in your post, it's ridiculous. Allow me to address each one.

Originally Posted by cramerro

They aren't "ponying up 20%"... even if that is the eventual share of the entire line.

So M1 Rail isn't ponying up 20% even if it's ponying up 20%? Which is it?

They ponied up 100%, including donating high level staff to serve the M1 project throughout the planning and fundraising stages. They joined forces becaue they thought it was the right thing to do - not beacuse they thought thier initial line was junk.

Then why didn't the M1 Rail altruists proceed with construction on their own line? Why bother with the hassle of applying for federal funds if they had a winner? There was--and still is--nothing stopping M1 Rail from building a downtown streetcar with their own money. They could put shovels in the ground this afternoon.

And, yes, 'all' they would get is the line between Hart Plaza and New Center, which links a LOT of activity centers and major city institutions in the smallest length possible, ceratinly meeting most of the goals of the people putting up $$$ to help people move to Mid.