Mouroun seeks statewide referendum this November on proposed new bridge to Canada

[artds]

No article yet. I just got a ClickOnDetroit news update on my phone that read: "Ambassador Bridge owners seek statewide referendum this November on proposed new bridge to Canada."

[Scottathew]

http://www.freep.com/article/2012042...text|FRONTPAGE

The owners of the Ambassador Bridge are hoping to take their fight to block Gov. Rick Snyder’s proposed new international bridge to the November ballot.The Detroit International Bridge Co. said this afternoon it is undertaking a drive for a statewide referendum in November that would require Michigan voters to approve any new bridge or tunnel to Canada for motor vehicles.

The State Board of Canvassers must decide whether to authorize a petition, and then backers would have to collect more than 300,000 signatures of voters to put the measure on the ballot.

The bridge company, which is owned by billionaire businessman Manuel [[Matty) Moroun and his family, have been fighting for years to block the new public bridge project, dubbed by Snyder the New International Trade Crossing and also known as the Detroit River International Crossing....

[Scottathew]

Weak. He'll do anything to protect his empire.

[professorscott]

Super weak. A referendum to require a referendum? That's wild. I wonder if that's even constitutionally permissible. What an ass.

[Downriviera]

Dear Mr. Maroun,

If you pay me $350,000.00 I will vote no. I will also try to convince my friends and family to vote no as well, for an additional $100,000.00 of course.

[Vic01]

http://www.freep.com/article/20120420/NEWS05/120420061/Ambassador-Bridge-Matty-Moroun-referendum?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

300,000 signatures? no problem... he'll have signatures collected while the cars wait to cross his bridge, probably set up an "express lane"... sign here & go right through.
Hopefully Michigan voters will put this ass in his place and vote it down.

[Gorath]

"any new bridge"

I suppose this doesn't require needing a vote for his second span. But I did read "any new bridge".

[Wesley Mouch]

Brilliant! Use the tools of government to your advantage.

I despise what he's trying to do, but I admire his tenacity and creativity. I've been wondering what his next move would be. Last I heard he was 'no longer in charge' of the bridge. I guess that's no longer true. That was only a tactic.

Now we know his next move. I think he will succeed. He didn't pay off legislators of both parties for nothin.

[townonenorth]

I'd sooner collect signatures to allow the state to take over the Ambassador Bridge, or better yet Detroit. They could use the revenue.

[bugs1739]

There's an abandoned train station that should be restored and reopened for both Amtrak and freight trains when Matty is pushing to build the second span.

[detlump]

There's still the option of the federal government coming in and taking over the project. It may make this latest maneuver moot.

[Detroitnerd]

To the tune of "I'd Like to Buy the World a Coke"

I'd like to buy my bridge some votes
So the only bridge is mine,
Cause my monopoly’s been safe
Since 1979.

[GUSHI]

There is nothing wrong with him, protecting his, you would all do the same and if you say you wouldn't bullshit.

[Detroitnerd]

There is nothing wrong with him, protecting his, you would all do the same and if you say you wouldn't bullshit.

Well, if you say to me, "He's protecting his monopoly. A great many people, put in his situation, would do the same," I buy that.

If you say to me, "He's protecting his monopoly. He's a ruthless businessman and he's going to use every advantage to protect it," I'd shrug. That's obvious.

Where we disagree is that there's nothing wrong with him doing this. Don't you believe in competition, the free marketplace, producing better and cheaper goods and services for the enrichment of the public sphere? Is there nothing wrong with a person clinging to a monopoly and holding the region back to where we only have as many crossings as we did 80 years ago? No, something is definitely wrong with that.

[GUSHI]

Tunnel and port Huron also are crossing, he may be scum, but he is a very wise business man. He is just protecting his, I would do the same, but then again I wouldn't let the train station just sit N rot either.

[stromberg2]

It doesn't matter....Canada will never allow his bridge to land there. It's all moot.

Stromberg2

[Hamtragedy]

You have a point there.

[canuck]

How much does a statewide referendum cost? It goes to show how disconnected, or maybe how connected these guys are.

[Richard]

So if the new bridge does not get built
Canada is just going to walk away from
the future 100s of millions in trade that
we are led to believe it will generate in
the future?

To be able to do anything of scale in Detroit
you are forced to become "connected" .

[mikeg19]

It doesn't matter....Canada will never allow his bridge to land there. It's all moot. Stromberg2

Exactly. Canada will never approve the second twin span. The whole point is to move truck traffic out of downtown Windsor, not open up more lanes into it.

Having said that, I think he realizes that. He's just going to do whatever he can to eliminate the second span downriver from being built. You've gotta hand it to the guy and his team of lawyers; they aren't idiots. I think I've underestimated Matty's influence and business knowledge. Too bad the guy's a jerkoff.

[compn]

whats his dumbass going to do when the bridge needs repairs? how old is it now? cant last forever.

[MikeyinBrooklyn]

I am no fan of Matty or his tactics. I am relatively sure he is aware he will lose his fight to stop the "other bridge" eventually. But the longer it's delayed, the more money he makes for lack of competition. Given his advanced age, and the fact that a new bridge's completion is years away, it is likely that he will "win": that is, he'll be six feet under before a car or truck crosses a new span.

I wonder what his company will do when he's gone; it seems Matty is fairly aloof regarding public opinion, sentiment in the business community, etc. I suspect his heirs will be more grounded in the real world when he's gone.

I am a "free-bridger". If you got money, and want to build a bridge between Detroit and Windsor, I say build it. Both to allow for more capacity and to provide redundancy in case of terrorism or other disaster, I think there should be 2 bridges. I hope twenty years from today there is both a new Ambassador and a downriver bridge [[Coleman A. Young Crossing? Just kidding). However something is built, I do hope the financing is carefully planned. In NY, the Tappan Zee Bridge replacement has lurched from a $4B proposal to a $20B proposal in less than a decade; and there is no history history of such projects coming in on time or on budget. Hope they're careful here.

There is no chance that Michigan or Detroit will take over the Ambassador Bridge: it is a federally chartered business and would require an act of Congress. Neither the US House nor Senate- especially the House- would pass it. Matty owns the Ambassador, unlikely to change unless he decides to sell or kicks the bucket, much as would like it otherwise.

[townonenorth]

I don't think he has a chance to get the signatures needed to force a referendum.

[drjeff]

I don't think he has a chance to get the signatures needed to force a referendum.

The timeline is a little tight but he has to resources to hire a bunch of people to collect sign

[drjeff]

That was supposed to say signatures.