Synder backs DRIC

**MSUguy** · January-20-11, 12:24 AM

Suck on that Matty. I swear if this actually gets built I will be driving across this bridge the first day it opens.

http://www.freep.com/article/2011011...for-first-time

**BrushStart** · January-20-11, 01:06 AM

Frick yeah!

NorthEndere · January-20-11, 04:52 AM

I fully expected him to come out in favor of this after keeping Granholm's transit secretary on, but he made it official and that feels good. He knows better than to look a gift-horse that lucrative in the mouth.

Now, the ball is in the court of the rigidly ideological Republicans in the legislature. He and everyone else just set up an offer they can't refuse. Let's see if they are smart enough not to refuse it, this time. Matty, also has a choice. He can keep fighting the inevitable, or he can get on board and find a dignified way to take this short-term hit for the long-term good of the state.

I don't think Michiganders realize how big this will be for the state. This is the kind of thing you look back 50 years from now and marvel on.

bartock · January-20-11, 09:09 AM

Originally Posted by NorthEnder

I fully expected him to come out in favor of this after keeping Granholm's transit secretary on, but he made it official and that feels good. He knows better than to look a gift-horse that lucrative in the mouth.

Now, the ball is in the court of the rigidly ideological Republicans in the legislature. He and everyone else just set up an offer they can't refuse. Let's see if they are smart enough not to refuse it, this time. Matty, also has a choice. He can keep fighting the inevitable, or he can get on board and find a dignified way to take this short-term hit for the long-term good of the state.

I don't think Michiganders realize how big this will be for the state. This is the kind of thing you look back 50 years from now and marvel on.

Realizing they have a strong majority, I wouldn't put this just on "rigidly ideological Republicans" Matty historically has put politicians of all shapes, sizes, parties and ideologies in his pocket. Hopefully, the matching funds part will be too much for those he's trying to buy to risk losing their next election on. Then, he'll be back to filing lawsuits.

**jackie5275** · January-20-11, 10:48 AM

Originally Posted by NorthEnder

INow, the ball is in the court of the rigidly ideological Republicans in the legislature. He and everyone else just set up an offer they can't refuse. Let's see if they are smart enough not to refuse it, this time.

I really doubt they will refuse it. They need to be able to support their fellow Republican, the gov. It will be a show of unity and because it's being proposed by a Republican gov., it will now be all fine & good to accept it.

**rb336** · January-20-11, 08:32 AM

I prefer Rick Backs DRIC
extra kudos for leveraging the 550 million from the Canadians as MDOT matching funds for roadway repair

**R8RBOB** · January-20-11, 08:50 AM

Moroun could not been happy to hear that the new governor openly stated that he want a publicly-owned bridge over the D river. Looks like they need to spread more bribe money to the Lansing politicians.

**maxx** · January-20-11, 02:08 PM

He should ask for his money back. lol

**Hypestyles** · January-20-11, 02:39 PM

this project needs to be fast-tracked as soon as possible, secure the design and layout, get the ground broken, find the local detroit residents to train and hire for the construction and security jobs, etc.

**kraig** · January-20-11, 08:53 AM

Originally Posted by rb336

I prefer Rick Backs DRIC
extra kudos for leveraging the 550 million from the Canadians as MDOT matching funds for roadway repair

While the paying back of the loan is still a concern [[the toll revenue numbers simply aren't there), it is good that he managed to leverage the loan for matching funds. Did Granholm ever try that?

**Wesley Mouch** · January-21-11, 10:10 AM

Originally Posted by kraig

While the paying back of the loan is still a concern [[the toll revenue numbers simply aren't there), it is good that he managed to leverage the loan for matching funds. ...

This debate has been framed in terms of payback. Why?

We have FREEways in Michigan. The state [[or Feds) pay because good roads [[or public transit) help everyone economically. The Canadians get it. They're ready to fund to support their economy.

I crossed for free in Buffalo recently. Why can't this road be as toll-free as I-94.

**kraig** · January-21-11, 10:33 AM

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

This debate has been framed in terms of payback. Why?

We have FREEways in Michigan. The state [[or Feds) pay because good roads [[or public transit) help everyone economically. The Canadians get it. They're ready to fund to support their economy.

I crossed for free in Buffalo recently. Why can't this road be as toll-free as I-94.

Did you walk across or drive across for free? This is an International Border Crossing that is going to require tolls to fund itself. From the State's perspective, the amount of revenue that's brought in for the state's responsibility needs to be enough to pay off the loan. Otherwise, the difference will have to come from the State's general fund. Which means some type of cut will have to be made such as State Police, Human Services or State road projects. From the Senate and House perspectives. Do you take the risk of neglecting the roads that 9 or 10 million state residents drive everyday for the sake of a border crossing that will, at best projections, only handle around 10 thousand vehicles per day? Especially, when you consider that the conversation for the new crossing has been reduced from need to simple redundacy.

**kraig** · January-21-11, 10:49 AM

This is why questions need to be answered.

Rep. Paul Opsommer, R-DeWitt, chairman of the House Transportation Committee, which must approve legislation allowing the DRIC to be built, said much of the GOP opposition focused on allowing the state to enter into joint contracts with private companies for roads and other transportation projects.
He said he hopes those objections can be quelled with revisions to protect taxpayers from getting stuck with costs private companies should pay. The DRIC would be built and funded by a private contractor who would be paid back with bridge toll fees.

Now, if a private contractor is funding the building of the DRIC as stated. Why is a 550 million dollar loan to the State of Michigan needed? And doesn't this statement confilct with what Snyder said? If you're in the State House or the Senate, you would probably want clarification before you proceed.

Read more: Snyder's DRIC plan may pose difficulty with Republican-led Legislature | freep.com | Detroit Free Press http://www.freep.com/article/2011012...#ixzz1BgX0xlNW

**kenp** · January-20-11, 09:12 AM

I heard a rebuttal this morning on the radio from a private citizen [[Marty supporter) who claims the government wants this to be built so they can cash in on kick backs and dirty pay for play deals. He compared it to the Mcnamara Terminal. It was a funny way to start the morning.

**kraig** · January-20-11, 10:25 AM

Originally Posted by kenp

I heard a rebuttal this morning on the radio from a private citizen [[Marty supporter) who claims the government wants this to be built so they can cash in on kick backs and dirty pay for play deals. He compared it to the Mcnamara Terminal. It was a funny way to start the morning.

The DRIC is a 5.5 Billion dollar proposal. Are any of us naive enough to think that some DRIC supporters aren't spreading some cash around? The Corradino Group has essentially put themselves into the driver's seat on this one. They received an over inflated 36 million to do the DRIC study, which was really a foregone conclusion since everyone knew the entire time that they would reject every proposal and pick the Delray site, having a former governor/ambassador to Canada on the payroll as a lobbyist was both legal and smart. It didn't hurt that they periodically had Granholm's husband on the payroll as well.

The Group is also well versed in P3's and make a lot of donations as well. But, no one in the group has the profile or bad press that MM has. We need to stop fooling ourselves into thinking that this is a good vs. evil type of fight. It's one special interest with big money against another special interest with big money, that's all.

**daddeeo** · January-20-11, 10:34 AM

Yawn. Not getting excited until they start work on it.

**Mikeg** · January-20-11, 10:51 AM

Let's see, we already have two international border crossings in Detroit that are underutilized and which are recognized for their historical character. But because there's some "free" money and "new" jobs involved, the "preservationists" have no qualms about supporting the kind of international border crossing "sprawl" that DRIC will provide. Is it because of their animosity towards "Matty" and their connections to the right political machines and background machinations?

**rb336** · January-20-11, 11:55 AM

Someone's drinking the Manny Tea. I've seen the bridge, it isn't underutilized. Manny is trying to play both sides of the argument. He claims the reports that say the second bridge will be needed are wrong, yet he is using those to get government backing for another bridge in Buffalo. What you don't seem to understand is that you don't plan a project like this for CURRENT usage but for PROJECTED usage. This is, at least, a five-year project. The only reason to NOT proceed is to protect the mannyopoly

**j to the jeremy** · January-20-11, 12:06 PM

Originally Posted by Mikeg

Let's see, we already have two international border crossings in Detroit that are underutilized and which are recognized for their historical character. But because there's some "free" money and "new" jobs involved, the "preservationists" have no qualms about supporting the kind of international border crossing "sprawl" that DRIC will provide. Is it because of their animosity towards "Matty" and their connections to the right political machines and background machinations?

The tunnel can't support the heavy truck shipping which relies on the Ambassador, the Bluewater, and the future DRIC crossing.

**Detroitej72** · January-20-11, 12:47 PM

Originally Posted by Mikeg

Let's see, we already have two international border crossings in Detroit that are underutilized?

What facts are you basing the underutilized argument on?

Originally Posted by Mikeg

But because there's some "free" money and "new" jobs involved, the "preservationists" have no qualms about supporting the kind of international border crossing "sprawl" that DRIC will provide. Is it because of their animosity towards "Matty" and their connections to the right political machines and background machinations?

Do you really believe that or are you just trying to stir the pot a little?

NorthEndere · January-21-11, 03:55 AM

Mike's our resident teabagger, in case no one has noticed. And, I've noticed that in my short time, here. Is anyone honestly surprised who he's making the argument for?

**Mikeg** · January-21-11, 07:27 AM

Originally Posted by NorthEnder

Mike's our resident teabagger, in case no one has noticed. And, I've noticed that in my short time, here. Is anyone honestly surprised who he's making the argument for?

I am not a tea drinker nor am I a scrotum sucker.

NorthEnder, if you have a problem with what I write, counter it with some opinion and facts, not juvenile name calling and sexual slurs.

**kenp** · January-21-11, 08:46 AM

Originally Posted by NorthEnder

Mike's our resident teabagger, in case no one has noticed. And, I've noticed that in my short time, here. Is anyone honestly surprised who he's making the argument for?

Is anyone honestly surprised who Northender is making the argument for?

**Searay215** · January-21-11, 09:23 AM

Has anyone seen a map of where the new span would be built and what does it connect too? Any major highways?

**Novine** · January-21-11, 09:30 AM

"Novine, if you have something to dispute with what I wrote, I'm all ears."

My question isn't with what you wrote, it's with the idea that we should question Snyder's plans based on what you know or don't know. Stuedle's well-versed in what the FHA is going to expect for matching funds, etc. I would presume that if Snyder says that has been worked out, then it's been worked out.