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.

**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.

**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?

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.

**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.

**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.

**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.

**Mikeg** · January-20-11, 12:45 PM

Originally Posted by rb336

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

What YOU don't seem to understand is that I don't drink anyone's tea but my own and I'm not the simpleton you seem to be implying.

Why is it that anyone who expresses an opinion outside of the narrow groupthink on this forum always gets SHOUTED AT and personally accused of being something or another. Where's the tolerance for diversity of opinion? Where's the civility of discourse?

Personally, I'd rather see private capital take the risk that the PROJECTED usage will materialize. The DRIC looks to me to be nothing than another one of those taxpayer-funded "shovel ready stimulus projects".

**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?

**Danny** · January-20-11, 01:45 PM

Sorry Maroun! The NERD governor has spoken. If you don't fix your bridge problems, The state government will move on with the new international bridge without you.

**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.

**detroitbob** · January-20-11, 02:48 PM

Originally Posted by Danny

Sorry Maroun! The NERD governor has spoken. If you don't fix your bridge problems, The state government will move on with the new international bridge without you.

It seems more like "The state government will move on with the new international bridge without you". regardless of what you do.

This could have been settled months ago had the Legislature moved on it and not stalled. However, the ability to leverage the 500+ million in Canadian money as matching funds for roads is a new added feature.

Wonder if they could use some of it for road cleanup after the next snow...

ferntruth · January-20-11, 04:04 PM

Originally Posted by Mikeg

What YOU don't seem to understand is that I don't drink anyone's tea but my own and I'm not the simpleton you seem to be implying.

Why is it that anyone who expresses an opinion outside of the narrow groupthink on this forum always gets SHOUTED AT and personally accused of being something or another. Where's the tolerance for diversity of opinion? Where's the civility of discourse?

Personally, I'd rather see private capital take the risk that the PROJECTED usage will materialize. The DRIC looks to me to be nothing than another one of those taxpayer-funded "shovel ready stimulus projects".

Who exactly is shouting on this thread, other than you?
If anything, it appears that Rb's point may have struck close to home for you.

**rbdetsport** · January-20-11, 04:18 PM

Originally Posted by detroitbob

Wonder if they could use some of it for road cleanup after the next snow...

Studies show that road cleanup actually causes more accidents

**Gistok** · January-20-11, 04:37 PM

Originally Posted by Mikeg

What YOU don't seem to understand is that I don't drink anyone's tea but my own and I'm not the simpleton you seem to be implying.

Why is it that anyone who expresses an opinion outside of the narrow groupthink on this forum always gets SHOUTED AT and personally accused of being something or another. Where's the tolerance for diversity of opinion? Where's the civility of discourse?

Personally, I'd rather see private capital take the risk that the PROJECTED usage will materialize. The DRIC looks to me to be nothing than another one of those taxpayer-funded "shovel ready stimulus projects".

Mikeg, I agree with you on the private funding aspect of this project. Unfortunately Maroun has pissed off so many people [[not just "preservationists") that he's been his own worst enemy on the bridge discussion.

I can see him having the last laugh [[likely from the grave at the pace of events for building another bridge). The only way for his bridge to become competitive with the farther downriver crossing... is to charge lower rates.

Since the Ambassador Bridge is already paid for... he has the advantage of reducing his rates to a point lower than the DRIC can competitively charge and still make bond payments on the new bridge.

Perhaps Maroun's final trump card is that maybe Wall Street is turned off by a bridge who's competitor will undercut prices to make sure it cannot pay off its' construction bonds? I wouldn't put it past him.

Then who makes up the difference in the cost of paying off those bridge bonds??

**rb336** · January-20-11, 04:41 PM

Personally, I'd rather see private capital take the risk that the PROJECTED usage will materialize. The DRIC looks to me to be nothing than another one of those taxpayer-funded "shovel ready stimulus projects".

let's see -
Shovel ready? no, not for at least two years.
Stimulus project? Yes. 10,000 good paying jobs on this side of the border. And the Canadians are paying. How can you possibly object to that?

Infrastructure should not be in the hands/at the mercy of private interests. when it is, you get the petty fiefdoms of Germany starting wars over who controls what bend in the river, holding commerce hostage to their whims.

Privately funded roadways have had higher cost overruns and greater fare increases than public. Why? the owners aren't accountable

**Mikeg** · January-20-11, 08:42 PM

Originally Posted by Detroitej72

What facts are you basing the underutilized argument on?

According to Crain's Detroit Business staff member and fellow DY forum member Bill Shea:

"The original primary justification for the project was the rising number of cars and trucks crossing the border in the late 1990s. However, traffic peaked in 1999 and began to fall, a trend hastened by the post-9/11 security measurements and by the collapse of the domestic auto industry." [source]

Originally Posted by ferntruth

Who exactly is shouting on this thread, other than you? If anything, it appears that Rb's point may have struck close to home for you.

Someone's drinking the Rb336 tea. Writing in all caps is like shouting and I only used them in my response to Rb's comment which contained some shouted words. I can read and make the distinction between the words "current" and "projected", can you?

More from Bill Shea:

Earlier I had mentioned that DRIC has been touted as a "stimulus" project -

[because of the collapse in traffic since 1999] "other reasons were found to build the bridge, such as safety and jobs..... Creation of construction jobs, which Snyder didn't specifically mention, also has been a leading justification for DRIC in recent months."

Regarding Canada's $550 million offer -

"No details were ever made public of the original offer, but it's been said that it was never a loan offer, but instead is simply Canada basically paying the entire DRIC construction cost, and then taking Michigan's portion of the bridge tolls to pay back whatever it spent on the Michigan side of the border. The biggest question Snyder's statement tonight prompts is thus: If Canada isn't actually giving Michigan cash, then the 20 percent local match on a federal highway project still has to come from somewhere."