Rashida Tlaib: Moroun 'disregards federal processes'

[Reality_Check]

SW Detroit state rep dishes tough talk again today in Freep: http://www.freep.com/article/2009040...68/0/OPINION01

Excerpts:

"To my great disappointment, there has been no significant opposition from our state and local elected officials, despite the fact that this company, owned by a Grosse Pointe billionaire, disregards federal processes specifically designed to protect the public from irreparable harm to their health and environment. The Ambassador Bridge company's history of taking shortcuts to expedite its profits must end; the health of our children and well-being of our community are at stake.

". . . A number of elected officials act as though they are already swayed because of political contributions. They turn their heads to the Ambassador Bridge company's act-now-ask-later maneuvers. It must stop.We deserve respect."

At last month's local Coast Guard hearing, she adds: "Among the scattered Ambassador Bridge company supporters were kids, paid $40 to attend and hold professional signs."

Freep roundup on this issue also has pro-bridge column by Adolph Mongo [['Project will bring new jobs and boost economy') and editorial saying the "unconstructive holy war" should end because "the region will eventually need both bridges."

[BShea]

Prostitution, cancer and asthma?

Wow.

[gravitymachine]

where you have truckers, you have prostitutes. where you have trucks, you have diesel particulate in the air

[dexterferry]

BShea, what does Dan Stamper have on you? Or did Matty just have your driveway paved or something?

[kraig]

I checked out the City Council meeting on Monday March 30th and it appeared that there were some Council Members that had some concerns about the project. So, I don't think it's fair to say that there is no opposition from local leaders, in fact, I think that's all there is from the local leaders.

The real problem was that there several City of Detroit departments that were unaware of the permits that the Bridge company had asked for and had been granted. In typical Detroit fashion, none of the Departments have been communicating with each other regarding the Bridge Companies permits and applications. Furthermore, it turned out that the Mayor's Office and the City Council had actually passed a resolution that gave the Bridge Company permission to put up the fence at Riverside Park. Of course, no one had remembered that. It was so bad, that one person from the Buidling Department was unaware of what her own office had been doing. As it turns out, the Building Department has been sitting on some applications from the Bridge company for more than two years which is what was used in court when the Bridge company was designated as a federal instrumentality.

I still say that there appears to be a biasness against the Bridge Company and for the DRIC that is backfiring on everyone. Think about it, everyone is up in arms about the finding of "no significant impact" for the bridge to put up a replacement span, but, no one had a problem with that same finding for the DRIC which is for a whole new bridge. The Coast Guard isn't going to second guess itself when it recognizes this kind of biasness.

Furthermore, Rashida Tlaib is quick to point ou that Windsor has problems with the Bridge, but hasn't pointed out that Canada is disputing the Environmental Assessment of the DRIC and recognizing that we may need to do the same. The people making the decisions have to know that there are genuine concerns and not just an anti Matty Moroun campaign afoot.

[BShea]

where you have truckers, you have prostitutes. where you have trucks, you have diesel particulate in the air

Yeah, but the trucks aren't stopping here for any length of time, are they? I thought it was more processing and getting on to their destinations. I could be wrong, I just don't know the typical cycle for trucks moving through. I thought they just moved on to wherever after getting thru customs.

In any case, if what you say is true, then will it not be true for the DRIC bridge that Tlaib is championing? I fail to understand how those concerns are valid for one bridge, but not both?

[kraig]

Come on, Dexter Ferry. It's not right to accuse someone of something just because they ask questions or exercise some independent thinking.

[BShea]

Dexter would appear to be of the cadre of anti-Moroun folks that reflexively lurch into ad hominem childishness whenever anyone dares question -- or point out the hypocrisy -- of the DRIC stuff.

I ask how DRIC would not attract prostitution and have air fouled by idle diesel trucks, so that must mean I'm a DIBC hack, right?

Moroun's a slum lord, so that means DRIC is wonderful. Or that's how the logic seems to go around here. Moroun is causing prostitution, cancer and asthma, but none of that will happen when much of Delray is bulldozed.

[Detroitnerd]

Bshea would appear to be of the cadre of pro-Moroun folks that are all too willing to disregard Moroun's disingenousness while bringing all his critical thinking to bear on Moroun's perceived opponents.

[kraig]

If anyone has a chance, read the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality's reports with regards to Detroit. There is a part of the East Side [[away from the incinerator) that has air quality that is nearly identical to that of the Southwest Side and a lot of people there are suffering from asthma too. There is not a bridge, salt mine, refinery or cement company anywhere around. So maybe, we should start looking at the identical conditions in the two areas for contributing health factors.

1. Abandoned buildings with feces and bird droppings.
2. Lead and Asbestos in the homes.
3. Disproportionate number of dangerous buildings that have been torn down in those areas when compared with the rest of the city.
4. Fire damaged homes that contain and produce dangerous levels of carbon monoxide.
5. Very poor sewerage and the most outdated pipes in the City spewing toxic steam from the sewers at a higher rate than any in the City.

I don't know, just a thought.

[BShea]

Bshea would appear to be of the cadre of pro-Moroun folks that are all too willing to disregard Moroun's disingenousness while bringing all his critical thinking to bear on Moroun's perceived opponents.

Wrong. I've called 'em out in print, too. Had a story a few weeks ago on their proposed changes to their portion of the Gateway that could jeopardize the federal funding. Not something I think DIBC enjoyed reading.

Some of us can actually discuss the issue without the partisan blinders. Worries about illness and prostitution are no less valid in Delray, so for Tlaib to raise 'em in her Freep piece is odd. She opens herself up to the charges of hypocrisy that you can read above. And she does raise valid concerns ... but she fails to note those very same concerns have been raised about DRIC, which to me says this is a partisan political issue for her, and my "perception" of her as a Moroun opponent is a valid one, too.

There are other concerns about Moroun and DIBC that are valid, but that doesn't negate the value of the Ambassador Bridge.

[dexterferry]

bshea, your criticism of tlaib [[it's been going on for months now) is starting to seem partisan. and maybe I missed the part where it is wrong for a politician to be an opponent of a billionaire slumlord who has wreaked havoc in her district for decades. . .

you sure have great faith in a greedy monopolist, bshea. And I don't think it's an ad hominum attack to wonder where that faith came from when, as Detroitnerd pointed out, you seem so enjoy viciously employing those stellar critical thinking skills against Moroun's "opponent" FAR MORE than the man himself.

[Detroitnerd]

"Wrong."

No, I think you still have the appearance of it, at least on this forum.

"I've called 'em out in print, too."

Is that so? How do you feel about the claim, often bandied about, that the "replacement span" isn't intended to be used permanently, that it's going to be closed as soon as the work is finished on rehabilitating the first span? Do you accept that?

"Some of us can actually discuss the issue without the partisan blinders."

Does it hurt your arm to pat yourself on the back like that all the time?

"Worries about illness and prostitution are no less valid in Delray, so for Tlaib to raise 'em in her Freep piece is odd."

Is it odd? Look at Delray for yourself. It's been utterly destroyed. It's hard to argue that there's even a viable neighborhood left there anymore. For decades, it has been a polluted, increasingly vacant, toxic-smelling neighborhood, with Zug Island, the water filtration plant, the refineries and now a foul-smelling composting plant. Now look at Mexicantown. It's a vibrant neighborhood in the middle of a comeback. Now, if you were representing the district, which includes both, and you had a choice of having a new span in Mexicantown or in Delray, which do you think you would choose. In your rush to find a partisan issue so you can accuse Tlaib of hypocrisy, I think you miss a valid distinction.

"There are other concerns about Moroun and DIBC that are valid, but that doesn't negate the value of the Ambassador Bridge"

Nobody is saying that the bridge isn't important. I think there is a very real debate going on here, and I feel that Tlaib is being sincere, at least way more sincere than Stamper and Moroun. As she should be: She's representing her constituents; the Ambassador crowd are naturally only interested in their own enterprise.

[BShea]

bshea, your criticism of tlaib [[it's been going on for months now) is starting to seem partisan. and maybe I missed the part where it is wrong for a politician to be an opponent of a billionaire slumlord who has wreaked havoc in her district for decades. . .

you sure have great faith in a greedy monopolist, bshea. And I don't think it's an ad hominum attack to wonder where that faith came from when, as Detroitnerd pointed out, you seem so enjoy viciously employing those stellar critical thinking skills against Moroun's "opponent" FAR MORE than the man himself.

Tlaib can do as she pleases, and I believe she fully believes she's serving her constituents, or at least some of them [[because more than a few support the DIBC and work for it). That's her job. But when she publishes hypocritical stuff, I'm going to call it out. And the DIBC doesn't make a habit of publishing hyperbolic letters in the big newspapers.

You have no idea where my faith lies. Whatever Moroun's alleged havoc-wreaking might be/been, there's a public value in the Ambassador Bridge. Tlaib thinks it's a "monstrosity" but she's very much in the minority in that [[although I'd guess you're in that foxhole with her). And I'm here to talk about the bridge projects.

Questioning politicians, especially when they raise the specter of cancer and prostitution in this context, is pretty normal, I'd say ... even more so when that politician conveniently leaves out facts. Sounds like playing the very game she accuses the other side of.

I'll wait here while you explain to me how concerns about dirty air and prostitutes are purely a DIBC problem and won't be a DRIC problem. Tlaib implied it, you're obviously related to her, work for her, campaigned for her, paved he driveway, or some nonsense [[because, obviously, you can question something only when you're a vested, partisan party to it, right?), so you can explain that one.

You know what this is akin to? George W. Bush. He's been highly praised in Africa and some circles for his significant committment to fighting AIDS in Africa. That's pretty much agreed upon. But the bridge discussion is like saying the funding to fight AIDS he mandated was bad because he did stuff elsewhere people didn't like. Some people are unable to seperate the issues, and that's a shame.

"Moroun is bad, so everything he does is bad." That about hit the nail on the head for this one?

[BShea]

Is that so? How do you feel about the claim, often bandied about, that the "replacement span" isn't intended to be used permanently, that it's going to be closed as soon as the work is finished on rehabilitating the first span? Do you accept that?

Who is bandying that about? I hadn't heard that, and on its face it sounds absurd. Why would they spend $1 billion on a new span to then close it?

Look at Delray for yourself. It's been utterly destroyed. It's hard to argue that there's even a viable neighborhood left there anymore.

I have. We wrote a lengthy story on it. We went in and talked to residents and business owners. Are you suggesting the best thing for the remaining residents is to remove them and close the businesses? There's going to be people living there after DRIC is built. And the worries about prostitution and bad air will be just as valid.

Now, if you were representing the district, which includes both, and you had a choice of having a new span in Mexicantown or in Delray, which do you think you would choose.

Trouble is, eventually you need both. It's not one or the other. Even the Morouns say that. Traffic will one day resume to previous levels. Moroun says his concern is having two bridges before traffic justifies it -- which is sound logic. So in the end, opposing a second span -- for either DIBC or DRIC -- is a dead-end position.

Nobody is saying that the bridge isn't important.

Except Tlaib, who told everyone the Ambassador Bridge is a monstrosity. And her Freep column goes after Moroun -- which is fine by me, she can target who she pleases -- but a main point of her arguement is the current construction there, and her criticism fails to target MDOT, as well. Gateway is a state project because 75 and 96 needed a new interchange with the bridge. That's a fact. His second span itself has almost zero impact because it's next to one already there. In any case, the second span has NO WHERE near the impact on a neighborhood as DRIC does.

The Gateway project affects a lot more people in Mexicantown than the second span itself. But not criticism from Tlaib on that, I see.

MDOT and the DRIC backers say Gateway had nothing to do with a second span, which is 100% pure bullshit because I have the MDOT documents that clearly spell out that it does.

I do agree with Tlaib and everyone else that DIBC needs to get trucks off the surface streets.

[Detroitnerd]

[quote=BShea;2306]Is that so? How do you feel about the claim, often bandied about, that the "replacement span" isn't intended to be used permanently, that it's going to be closed as soon as the work is finished on rehabilitating the first span? Do you accept that?

Who is bandying that about? I hadn't heard that, and on its face it sounds absurd. Why would they spend $1 billion on a new span to then close it?

Well, take a look at this story in that weekly rag. That's the argument they made with the DEQ. Does it strike you as a wee bit disingenuous?

http://metrotimes.com/archives/story.asp?id=9730

... Moroun and his minions are calling the new span an "enhancement" to the existing bridge. The "enhancement" is needed, the bridge company states in documents filed with the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, because the existing Ambassador Bridge has to be closed for "evaluation and repair," and to determine whether the 77-year-old structure is "economically viable for future use." "Once the new structure is completed," the company told the DEQ, "the existing Ambassador Bridge will be taken out of service in order to evaluate and make repairs deemed necessary and economically feasible. Upon completion of the anticipated repairs, the existing bridge will be used to provide redundancy and backup support when necessary to ensure the free flow of traffic at all times."
So, there you have it. We don't really need a new bridge, except that we really do need a new bridge. Or, to put it another way, in Matty's view, we really do need a new bridge, we just don't need one that will provide his company with competition, and the public with an alternative to his monopoly.

These are the kinds of reasons people look at Moroun and say he can't be trusted.

Look at Delray for yourself. It's been utterly destroyed. It's hard to argue that there's even a viable neighborhood left there anymore.

I have. We wrote a lengthy story on it. We went in and talked to residents and business owners. Are you suggesting the best thing for the remaining residents is to remove them and close the businesses? There's going to be people living there after DRIC is built. And the worries about prostitution and bad air will be just as valid.

Haha. I'm not suggesting anything. If you really talked to residents in Delray and interview them, you've probably found that a great number of them believe that efforts to "remove them and close the businesses" have been the city's standard plan for decades, witholding city services and routing bus lines around it. It has gotten to the point where that neighborhood probably *shouldn't* be inhabitated. It's toxic, polluted and, as I said, increasingly vacant.

Now, if you were representing the district, which includes both, and you had a choice of having a new span in Mexicantown or in Delray, which do you think you would choose.

Trouble is, eventually you need both. It's not one or the other. Even the Morouns say that. Traffic will one day resume to previous levels. Moroun says his concern is having two bridges before traffic justifies it -- which is sound logic. So in the end, opposing a second span -- for either DIBC or DRIC -- is a dead-end position.

You are evading the question and obfuscating.

Nobody is saying that the bridge isn't important.

Except Tlaib, who told everyone the Ambassador Bridge is a monstrosity.

Haha. I'd say that monstrosities are pretty important too.

And her Freep column goes after Moroun -- which is fine by me, she can target who she pleases -- but a main point of her arguement is the current construction there, and her criticism fails to target MDOT, as well. Gateway is a state project because 75 and 96 needed a new interchange with the bridge. That's a fact. His second span itself has almost zero impact because it's next to one already there. In any case, the second span has NO WHERE near the impact on a neighborhood as DRIC does.

Don't like my argument about comparing Mexicantown to Delray? Feel you'd rather not address comparing a vibrant neighborhood with new businesses, well-anchored retail, local business organizations, nonprofits, renovations, new housing and marketplaces, a healthy immigrant stream with a neighborhood that's increasingly empty, polluted, with closing businesses, disappeared retail, few local organizations or nonprofits, few new residents? Well, avoid it and just try to bring up the Gateway Project or something else that will help you as you try to pin something on Tlaib.

What I'm saying [[again and, apparently, again) is that if you think a second span to the Ambassador has "has almost zero impact because it's next to one already there," [[Twice as many particulate emissions? Twice as many trucks?) and that "the second span has NO WHERE near the impact on a neighborhood as DRIC does," I think you're not looking at how depopulated, polluted and unpromising Delray is. Our city officials spent decades destroying that part of the city. I am not surprised that Tlaib would rather have a new crossing there than to have a twin crossing in Mexicantown. And I think you'd be in the minority in not apprehending why.

[Reality_Check]

How tiresome.

Regret starting this thread yesterday morning [[seems longer than that, doesn't it?)

Lesson learned. This clearly isn't the venue for reasoned, rational discussion of border crossing issues.

[ For the record, I see Bill's GWB/AIDS analogy as apt, much as I separate Nixon's fatal flaws from his game-changing China policy. Multi-dimensional views trump black-or-white rigidity. For further evidence, consider where all-right and all-wrong thinking by some Israeli and some Palestinian leaders has led to. . . .

Ooops, now I've gone and waved another red flag . . .]

[BShea]

JFK, is this so hard to understand?

We need two bridges at some point. The old AB four-lane span and the new DRIC eventually won't be enough.

A larger AB span and the separate DRIC crossing mean we have a better-flowing border -- when the traffic justifies it. Right now, it doesn't. Everyone agrees on that. Security concerns are another thing, but I'm talking traffic.

I'm sensing that people just want to shut down the AB, and when the time comes for two bridges, that another $3 billion be spent on DRIC No. 2 elsewhere -- just to spite Moroun.

[kraig]

Do the Bridge opponents/DRIC proponents realize that if the DRIC proposal goes down in flames they will have exhausted all arguments against the Bridge by allowing the DRIC to have a free pass?

By the way, when are the people in Southwest Detroit going to stand up and say that the Southwest Detroit Business Association does not speak for all of us?

I'm sick of all of these carpet-bagging state reps that are having their campaigns subsidized by the SDBA's Block Grant Money coming in and doing nothing but fight against the Bridge and appoint themselves and their friends over all of the non-profits and use everyone else as their footsoldiers.

[kraig]

I forgot to mention, another very strong contributing factor for asthma everywhere and especially in Southwest and Northeast Detroit is second hand smoke. In those areas the homes aren't ventilated as well as some other homes. The homes are also built very close together and the streets are very narrow, therefore, fresh air isn't anywhere near as prevelant as it should be. So, if anyone has to smoke, please invest in some type of device that's able to suck the smoke out of the air and please try to keep smoke away from children. When I was at the Coast guard meeting, it made me absolutely sick to see some of the same people that were complaining about family members having asthma smoking outside of the building, a school building at that that's across the street from Clark Park where children were playing soccer.

[Detroitnerd]

Oh, I get it. This was supposed to be a thread condemning Tlaib and her constituents, but instead it has turned into a more nuanced discussion of the issues -- or at least it did until some of the people posting started ignoring some good questions and changing the subject. I guess I'll leave this lovefest be.

[kraig]

Oh, I get it. This was supposed to be a thread condemning Tlaib and her constituents, but instead it has turned into a more nuanced discussion of the issues -- or at least it did until some of the people posting started ignoring some good questions and changing the subject. I guess I'll leave this lovefest be.

My fault DetroitNerd, LOL. I just had a couple of points I wanted to make about the issue in its entirety. Since, the whole argument is supposed to be about whether or not there is a need for further environmental impact studies.

[E hemingway]

Bshea: How about this for a valid concern:

The bomb under Matty’s bridge
http://joelontheroad.com/?p=2090

or how about this:

City sues to evict Matty from Riverside Park
http://joelontheroad.com/?p=1287

I have great respect for Crain's and other main-stream, muck-racking news sources and the role they play as watchdogs. But I have come to learn that these institutions don't bark as loudly or as fiercely at billionaires.

[Lorax]

This is just another example of too much wealth concentrated in too few hands, specifically Matty Moron.

How dare anyone decide they can disregard federal processes. I guess that's just the realm of the super rich. If any of us did it, we'd be indicted for obstruction. It's really amazing what immense wealth can do for you.

I say let's be constructive about this-

There's general agreement that a second bridge is needed- I think this one is too close to the AB, but that's my own opinion.

Legislatively force Moron to restore and reopen the MCD at his own expense as penalty for allowing it to be destroyed under his ownership, make it the nexus of a regional transportation hub from which rail lines both commercial as well as commuter originate from, then we'll entertain the idea of going ahead with this moron's folly.

[urbanoutdoors]

I think the bottom line here is transparency or lack there of... The argument that is being made at times on this thread is that if you are anti-DIBC then you must be pro-DRIC.. I am personally anti-Both but if I had to choose I would choose the DRIC bridge because public is allowed to have a voice in the process... I am not convinced that a new bridge is needed in any regard. If I had to have one I would chose the one with transparency, meetings and a voice for the public. I believe both bridges need to be studied more and that EIS should be required so that if nothing else there is accountability for the environmental damage that both would cause. If Matty does indeed get his bridge then he should have to be a good neighbor and contribute 200,000 to each the riverfront conservancy and the mexicantown/corktown green link as well as surrender all property such as MCS to the city or be fined in excess of 10 million dollars a year for derelict buildings... He Should not be allowed to take over WGB or have any traffic on city roads and by no means should he be allowed to build first and be reprimanded later... It makes no sense, not to mention the fact that if he does not magically acquire riverside park than this whole issue is moot... The coast guards approval is contingent upon all land being acquired and it does not look like the city is willing to budge on giving up riverside park and it would be a huge mistake if the city did not hold on to riverside.

So I think what it comes down to is this Residents of southwest as far as I can tell really don't want either bridge but if they have to have one they will take the one they have a say in... It has always been apparent that Matty would rather be the bully than be the neighbor with a conscience.