Mr. Moroun, please stop the lying

[Detroitdave]

Alright fine, So what happens if prop 6 passes ? don't take Canada's money and let's not build a bridge further down river . What are we stuck with ?

Windsor, Ontario, And Canada had made it perfectly clear they will NEVER allow a second span where matty wants it , so Canada offers the money to Buffalo or some were else and we are in the same boat we were in [[typical cynical Detroit and Michigan)This is what has kept this region behind the rest of most of the country and mystery to the rest of the country . Matty is happy and could careless because he has kept his monopoly on this end .

[Scottathew]

Why would we want jobs and infrastructure investment in Detroit? Oh wait, those are good things...

Well, we don't need the bridge, Matty's just trying to save us money! Oh wait, Matty wants to build his own bridge so he can MAKE money from it...

So private intrests say we don't need a public bridge because the private interest want to make money off of it, while at the same time saying that money can't be made off of it...

I'm really confused! Either that or Matty's ads are full of BS.

[Shollin]

My question is where does it stop? They're rebuilding 94 out past hall road, why should I have to pay for that? Do we vote for every bridge that needs to be built or repaired? Do we have a statewide vote for a light rail in Detroit? How did this even make it to a ballot? What does Moroun do if the people vote for a new bridge?

[Detroitdave]

He keeps it tied up in litigation as long as possible

[Shollin]

He keeps it tied up in litigation as long as possible

The upside is I don't think he has much time left.

[Danny]

There is no fair and balance politics anymore!

[Hermod]

Why would we want jobs and infrastructure investment in Detroit? Oh wait, those are good things...

Well, we don't need the bridge, Matty's just trying to save us money! Oh wait, Matty wants to build his own bridge so he can MAKE money from it...

So private intrests say we don't need a public bridge because the private interest want to make money off of it, while at the same time saying that money can't be made off of it...

I'm really confused! Either that or Matty's ads are full of BS.

What if the City of Detroit owned the Ambassador Bridge and the tolls from the bridge made up a big portion of the city's income?

Would we then be so eager to have the Canadians build a bridge?

Would we be demanding that Detroit be allowed to build the second span without regard to Canadian opposition?

Is the furor for a new bridge more of a "Let's stick it to Maroun?

[Scottathew]

Is the furor for a new bridge more of a "Let's stick it to Maroun?

No.

The furor is that both the American and Canadian governments have done studies that show a new crossing is needed, and that the best option is to have a new crossing, instead of adding more congestion to an existing crossing. This would give route redundancy and also direct access to freeways on the Canadian side.

People want the bridge and it has nothing to do with Matty.

There is anger and resentment toward the rich man who uses millions and millions to spread lies just so he can make a little bit more money before he dies.

None of us [[should) wish death on the man, but I do wonder why this man isn't trying to build a legacy for himself instead of an empire. Many of Detroit's billionaires give back to the community, but all Matty wants to do is make just a little bit more money before his time on earth is up.

[Wheels]

My question is where does it stop? They're rebuilding 94 out past hall road, why should I have to pay for that? Do we vote for every bridge that needs to be built or repaired? Do we have a statewide vote for a light rail in Detroit? How did this even make it to a ballot? What does Moroun do if the people vote for a new bridge?

It's not on the ballot yet, this is a proposal to put it on the ballot.

Wait: it is on the proposal ballot. Now I'm confused!

[gnome]

What if the City of Detroit owned the Ambassador Bridge and the tolls from the bridge made up a big portion of the city's income?

Would we then be so eager to have the Canadians build a bridge?

Would we be demanding that Detroit be allowed to build the second span without regard to Canadian opposition?

Is the furor for a new bridge more of a "Let's stick it to Maroun?

Hermod, playing the IF card is a canard. For example, IF we had flying cars ... Or IF Canada was our 51st State ... Or IF Matty wasn't the owner ...

IFs don't clarify anything and only serve to divert an issue down an exit ramp to no where. IF arguments are favorites with those who need smoke to confuzzle discussion. I don't see you as that kind of poster; but rather as a clear-eyed rationalist.

The reality is that the bile you hear about Matty and DIBC is well earned. The list is long and decades in the making. He has been a bad neighbor, a bully, a slumlord and generally a bad actor.

That is not an IF that is an IS.

[Wesley Mouch]

Matty can say what he wishes. The bridge supporters can say what they want.

Let's just make good decisions.

[detroitsgwenivere]

I wonder, how willing or able is the federal gov. to step in and force the building of the bridge? Like eminent domain in the name of national security. Not that I would necessarily advocate that type of action. I'm just wondering.

[Embee]

Anybody who thinks a new bridge isn't needed must not be familiar with the approach to the bridge on the Canadian side. It is a municipal road with 17 traffic lights that is full of transport trucks that are stopping and starting. There is actually a high school right on this road and it cuts through dense residential areas.

This is the only stretch of road on the route between Montreal and Mexico that is not a freeway. The Canadian and Ontario governments are currently building a 6-lane freeway to connect Highway 401 to the new bridge crossing.

Nobody on this side of the border can fathom why there would be people in Michigan who are against this. There's a reason why this breezed right through the Canadian parliament and is currently the #1 infrastructure priority in the entire country!! There are so many jobs at stake here and the current bridge and infrastructure are horribly outdated.

[Detroitdave]

Embee I am so glad someone from the other side of the bridge added to the discussion . It is important to know what is happening on your side of the bridge.
We are/will be partners in this and even though we are two different countries Windsor and Detroit are bonded.

What happens on this side does have some effect on that side. Windsor is nearly another county /city in southeast Michigan with families and friends on both sides of the border .

If this was a region without an international boarder you guys would be the "left bank" ;-) and BTW there are MANY people on this side of the border can't fathom why there are people who are against this , oh wait , it's about a monopoly !
Check out the links that have been posted it will explain a lot ! Another fine example is Belle isle .
We can't get out of our own way ! city council keeps blocking everything .
The city is completely broke ,they've screwed up the city for the past 40 years and now dragging their feet about moving forward , with grand standing and egos , and holding to an archaic mind set.
Their pride and ego wont' let the move Detroit Forward !
Like I said earlier Cynics and folks who are easy to sway and confuse .

It's not the magic bullet , but at the moment it's the best offer in our lifetime

This wont' happen again in our lifetime, This is a moment where we can really make a big step forward as a region, but greed and egos are holding us back.

[Hermod]

The reality is that the bile you hear about Matty and DIBC is well earned. The list is long and decades in the making. He has been a bad neighbor, a bully, a slumlord and generally a bad actor.

I would not argue with that assertion.

Hermod, playing the IF card is a canard. For example, IF we had flying cars ... Or IF Canada was our 51st State ... Or IF Matty wasn't the owner ...

IFs don't clarify anything and only serve to divert an issue down an exit ramp to no where. IF arguments are favorites with those who need smoke to confuzzle discussion. I don't see you as that kind of poster; but rather as a clear-eyed rationalist.

I am an engineer, Gnome. I am also against government spending money where it doesn't have to spend money.

My "if" question was to deterrmine how much of the motivation was "anti-Maroun" and how much was economic need for the bridge.

[gnome]

I'm with you Hermod, we should be spending what litte dough we have on fixing the crumbling road and bridge Infrastructure. But we are broke. It's tough paying for roads if you have no cash; however, the Feds do have a program where if the State will poney up 25% they will cover the other 75%. I may have the percentages wrong but the idea is for the local government to show their commitment by putting some skin in the game

That's a great deal, but if you are broke as swayback nag you ain't no way, no how gonna find 25% in the couch cushions. You ain't finding nothin but lint in your pockets, nothing but air in the cookie jar, nothing but nothing is nothing.

Impossible.

Except.

Snyder has found a way for Michigan to get $2.2 billion in road infrastructure money by applying our half of the NITC, read $550 million, to work as our skin in the game. Oh, and that $550 is being fronted by our neighbors.

Sounds like a sweet deal. For some maybe too sweet. Too much of a 3-card Monty sure bet.

If you are part of the too-good-to-be-true set, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree; but I don't see you as an out of hand skeptic. Just cautious. That is wise. As Ron Regan said, "trust but verify".

On your question regarding whether a new bridge is even needed, I would defer to a bridge expert, as I am not one myself. I'm not even an engineer like you. I'm a shmoe.

So where am I going to find a bridge expert? Especially one who knows everything there is to know about the Ambassador. Since the DIBC won't allow Federal bridge inspectors on the Ambassador, that is a tough order. Hmm.

Oh, I got it! How silly I didn't think of Matty himself. Perfect. He owns the Ambassador, presumably he knows the ambassador, and more than likely has had real life structural engineers all over the Ambassador.

Matty, our resident expert, sez "we need a new bridge".

So, to wrap up. Canada is giving us $550million and we are turning that into $2.2 billion to re-build other roads in our State and the foremost authority on bridges sez we need a new bridge.

I wish I could provide you the links to support the above claims, but I'm working on one of those I-thingies and cutting and pasteing is beyond my skill level; but you are smart guy, you can find them for yourself including the documents between neighbors.

[Richard]

Anybody who thinks a new bridge isn't needed must not be familiar with the approach to the bridge on the Canadian side. It is a municipal road with 17 traffic lights that is full of transport trucks that are stopping and starting. There is actually a high school right on this road and it cuts through dense residential areas.

This is the only stretch of road on the route between Montreal and Mexico that is not a freeway. The Canadian and Ontario governments are currently building a 6-lane freeway to connect Highway 401 to the new bridge crossing.

Nobody on this side of the border can fathom why there would be people in Michigan who are against this. There's a reason why this breezed right through the Canadian parliament and is currently the #1 infrastructure priority in the entire country!! There are so many jobs at stake here and the current bridge and infrastructure are horribly outdated.

There is a map that shows that Canada has the option to create a connector span that removes the truck traffic from the residential streets at a 1/3 of the taxpayers cost of a new bridge,much like Michigan just completed with the currant bridge.

Why is Canada opposed to this route?

To use the theory that the currant bridge is old is not a valid option as there are many major older bridges in operation all across the US with no problem.

I understand Canada wanting to use this as a job creator as we also use infrastructure projects as job creators but in our case the 4 billion that we are going to spend on this side will not create that many jobs and it is unsure as how many US jobs will actually be used in the construction of the bridge in itself.As it is being funded by Canada I am sure that they will request preferred employment in their country.Not to even mention the additional funding customs will need to man and maintain an additional facility long term on an already stretched budget.

[Hermod]

Gnome, I think that Embee answered my question without reference to Maroun. On the Windsor side, access to the Ambassador Bridge sucks. A second span at the Ambassador Bridge will not fix that. It is like the original Southfield Expressway terminating onto a two lane blacktop road at the time it was built. If we have these access problems on the Windsor side, I could see locating the bridge where there is better access.

I can also see Maroun opposing this, though I could also see any owner opposing this with more DetroitYes support for a more popular owner.

As I said, if the city owned the bridge Joanne Watson would be off-the-wall against it and calling the Canadians eeeeeevulllllll and racist for wanting to steal the Detroit's money and tarnish the "jewel".

I can also see the people in the state living outside the metro area supporting Maroun in this election as a way of "sticking it to Detroit".


.

[gnome]

Jeeze Richard, will you please read the original agreement between Canada and Michigan. It is all spelled out. Black and white. Clear as crystal.

But Richard brings up a valid issue. Some people won't read. Some people refuse to believe what they read.

I have a neighbor, I have spoken with him about the NITC, and I have laid out all the facts for his consideration. He responded by saying, "that looks real good, how did all those treaties work out for the Indians."

Meaning, anything read is not to be believed, the government will lie about everything, every time. The government is untrustworthy, the government is to be feared and not to be believed.

I hear those themes repeatedly on this Board. Color me a believer that we the people are the government and if we don't trust we, we got problems.

[gnome]

Well, Hermod IF the City owned the AB, that would have meant the Depression never would have happened, the Lindbergh baby never kidnapped, Hilter never would have burned the Reichstag and Tojo would have been wearing a toga.

The crushing wheels of history spares us few opportunities to repeat the the mistakes of the past, but here we are, it is 1930 there is a bridge waiting to be owned.

It could be ours if we say yes, but we are afraid of yes. Yes means change, change means the way things have always been will be different. We don't know different, all we know is what we know and what we know is, no.

No to change. No to the Ambassador in 1930 when it was for sale to whomever wanted it, and no to the NITC because it too will change what we know . No means no. We don't want to change, we see it across the headlines of every issue of the freep. We don't want to change Belle Isle because we don't see clogged toilets, leaky roofs and fallen buildings as a problem. It is our grit.

No, we say to light rail because our non-insured whooptie looks fine with the spinners; no to small tech firms in the Madison because they won't hire like our patron saint Henry did at the Rouge; no. No. Damn no.

We told you no about the zoo, but you stole it anyway and just because it shines again is no reason not to listen. We don't want change. We want everything like it has always been.

[Richard]

Jeeze Richard, will you please read the original agreement between Canada and Michigan. It is all spelled out. Black and white. Clear as crystal.

But Richard brings up a valid issue. Some people won't read. Some people refuse to believe what they read.

I have a neighbor, I have spoken with him about the NITC, and I have laid out all the facts for his consideration. He responded by saying, "that looks real good, how did all those treaties work out for the Indians."

Meaning, anything read is not to be believed, the government will lie about everything, every time. The government is untrustworthy, the government is to be feared and not to be believed.

I hear those themes repeatedly on this Board. Color me a believer that we the people are the government and if we don't trust we, we got problems.

LOL I can read okay but also when I read I look at long term growth and how a decision made today will affect the city and surrounding suburbs in the long term.

I read that the main play is based on the evil private enterprise and greed and using that emotion as a tool.

I read that the big three are heavy supporters as this will improve their delivery of products saving them time and money ,but somehow I find it hard for what ever reasons find to believe that those savings will be passed on in either increased wages or in the selling of a reduced priced automobile.So there is maybe a little greed factor in there. also.

I read that no other movers or shakers have come out and had any opinion on the matter.Other then the ones that will profit from it.

I read that one side wants the bridge built because it is destroying a neighborhood,forget about that that was a known effect of what would happen on the passing of NAFTA now it is an issue,but it is not an issue to wipe out a neighborhood on this side because it was a dump anyways right.

I read that transportation funds will become available that can be used for any purpose,so what are they going to be used for? Maybe to help fund a regional mass transit? I doubt it.

To me the bridge is mott it is in the limelight as a here and now today aspect without looking at the long term impacts,yes if you look just at the bridge it seems like a good deal and hard to pass up but one also needs to remember that there are others that see this as another link in a chain of events.It is important to also read about those events and look at the big picture to make a decision on if you are really comfortable with that decision.

[Embee]

Richard, the Canadian government will not build a freeway connection [[or a connecting span) to the Ambassador Bridge because the goal is to get the trucks [[and their associated pollution) out of these dense residential areas and away from the University of Windsor campus. Simply plowing through with a freeway or a connector span will not solve these problems.

I think some of this comes down to cultural differences. In the US people don't seem to trust their government and it appears that government officials can be bought off. In Canada, people trust that the government will do the right thing in the end and there is no concern that some billionaire can buy them off.

We don't/can't vote on any silly proposals here - all we do is vote for our representative and then let them make the laws and decisions that will benefit everyone as a whole. Completely different ballgame in the US it seems.

[Bham1982]

Is the furor for a new bridge more of a "Let's stick it to Maroun?

Yes, this is exactly what's driving the proposed bridge on this side of the river.

Michigan taxpayers just went into debt to the tune of $239 million for the gargantuan "Gateway" project at the Ambassador Bridge, which includes enough road capacity to accomodate an invading army of truckers.

Now we're just going to throw away that investment, because Canada wants to build us a "free" bridge further down the river. Maroun does seem to be a jerk, and that's driving this train.

[Bham1982]

The furor is that both the American and Canadian governments have done studies that show a new crossing is needed, and that the best option is to have a new crossing, instead of adding more congestion to an existing crossing.

If a new crossing is so desperately needed, then why is the most recently constructed crossing running far behind projected usage?

Again, Blue Water Span #2 was financed with a projection of 12 million annualized crossings, and currently hosts 5 million annualized crossings. Michigan taxpayers pick up the difference, which will obviously grow once you add yet another span.

[Bham1982]

Anybody who thinks a new bridge isn't needed must not be familiar with the approach to the bridge on the Canadian side. It is a municipal road with 17 traffic lights that is full of transport trucks that are stopping and starting. There is actually a high school right on this road and it cuts through dense residential areas.

This is why Canada supports the project, and is exactly why Michigan should not support the project.

Be honest, and tell the public that the bridge is for Windsor urban redevelopment purposes, and has nothing to do with trade or cross-border issues. It's about relocating a bridge to a location that makes more sense from Windsor's perspective.