Michigan budget fight could claim Detroit bridge project legislation

**BShea** · April-05-11, 12:36 PM

The Detroit River public bridge legislation expected to be introduced soon could become a casualty of the state budget battle -- not only between Dems and Republicans, but possibly in internecine fighting twixt Rick Snyder and his own party.

Rumors are gaining steam that the Dems are warning that their support for the bill might require Snyder to compromise with them. Insiders say their warning -- if it really was such a warning -- is largely pointless because Snyder needs to convince the GOP before he worries about the minority Dems.

Could the bridge bill die on the vine in the name of getting the budget done?

Link

**EL Jimbo** · April-05-11, 09:48 PM

This is BAD news for transportation across the state. Without that bridge deal we are going to lose BILLIONS of federal dollars because we won't have the matching funds.

**CLAUDE G** · April-05-11, 11:39 PM

Mauroon is prepared to build his bridge with his own money.

As much as some of us may hate him, atleast he aint using our money if his bridge gets approved.

**BrushStart** · April-06-11, 12:19 AM

Originally Posted by CLAUDE G

Mauroon is prepared to build his bridge with his own money.

As much as some of us may hate him, atleast he aint using our money if his bridge gets approved.

Seriously, Claude? Maroun is currently running commercials that say flat out that a second bridge isn't needed. So, if a bridge isn't needed, why does HE want to build one? Secondly, we have no guarantee that Maroun will build a second bridge in Michigan, especially considering that there are rumors that he wants to build the bridge in upstate New York, not Detroit. Lastly, Maroun WILL take taxpayer money, every time we have to drive over his border-crossing monopoly.

If Maroun could be trusted, and Canada was willing to work with him, and he spent some money cleaning up the neighborhoods he does business in, and he didn't have a long history of screwing people left and right, and he didn't attempt to buy every politician in the state, and I knew that he wouldn't gouge us on bridge fare for the rest of his life, and he didn't lie to us publicly while trying to pretend like he's our friend, I MIGHT, be okay with Maroun building a second bridge.

**Magnatomicflux** · April-06-11, 12:20 AM

It really doesn't matter that he'll build it himself. Canada isn't going to settle for anything less than DRIC, and I don't think the US Government will either, regardless of what happens with this budget battle. Work has already begun, funds have been set aside. Windsor will not allow Matty to build his bridge here no matter what. I can't think of the last time an issue was unanimously approved by the Canadian Government......that's a once in a lifetime event when spending money is the issue. Way too many industries support this new bridge on both sides of the boarder for this to fall apart.

I'm tellin' ya, DRIC is going to happen, one way or another.

http://buildthedricnow.com/2011/03/2...onal-security/

http://www.windsorstar.com/story_pri...7&sponsor=true

**CLAUDE G** · April-06-11, 01:09 AM

I don't think a second bridge is needed either, however here is why I support Mauroon...

#1 The current bridge is almost 80 years old. Eventhough I feel the Ambassador bridge is well maintained, if anything happens to that bridge we are all screwed. The big trucks are too big to use the Tunnel, and the traffic backups to use the tunnel are going to be insane.

I aint going to wait an hour or more to visit Windsor, and im deffinitly not going to drive to Port Huron to use the blue water bridge

#2 The approach ramps are already built for a second span of the Ambassador Bridge.

#3 The land that the second bridge will be built on is probably already accuired, or the rest of the land can be accuired cheaply since there is no major demolition that will need to take place.

#4 A second bridge will reduce traffic wait times to get to and from Canada.

#5 Its being built with Private money

The only issue I can see with a second span of the Ambassador bridge is that if we had a terrorist attack, is that it could damage the other bridge.

**Magnatomicflux** · April-06-11, 01:33 AM

I can see the benifits of all that, but Windsor still doesn't need to have all that traffic jammed down it's throat. The land on this side is bought and paid for, but there's never going to be a single support for that bridge put in the ground, because Windsor is dead set against it. He's not even allowed to demolish the homes on the property he bought.
I wouldn't wait an hour to visit Windsor either lol

It was my understanding that the $500M we loan Michigan will be recouped thru tolls, and any shortfalls in construction will be covered by Canada. I thought that $500M covers all of the costs to build on the Michigan side.....no? If it does, then you have to think that it won't just be on the heads of Michigan taxpayers, paying this debt back to Canada thru tolls, everyone that passes over that bridge will be contributing to paying down the debt.....even Canadians coming back home lol!

Am I wrong in how I understand this? Could be, I'm not to buisness savvy.

**EL Jimbo** · April-06-11, 06:06 AM

The people supporting Manny are ignoring a VERY important fact. Moroun has made such a bad name for himself in Windsor that the Canadians simply won't work with him. Either the public bridge gets built, or NO bridge gets built. That's why this whole discussion about Moroun is pretty pointless in my opinion. He's simply trying to be obstructionist because this new bridge potentially will cut into HIS profits. This whole facade he's running has nothing to do with the well-being of the people on either side of the river.

NorthEndere · April-06-11, 07:26 AM

The Freep has a different take on this, today, particularly that Matty even sees the writing on the wall. The senate may very well keep looking a gift horse in the mouth, but now, instead of obstructing a Democratic governor, they'll be embarrassing their own, who went to Washington to secure much-needed [[to put it lightly) roading funding for Michigan which it now tied to this. The stakes are much higher.

If the state GOP wants this fight, and wants turn into an electoral issue in two years down the road, well, bring it on. If Matty wants the remaining years of building a legacy to be futilely tied up in being a bad neighbor and bad citizen, so be it. He is proving by the day how conssumate a bridge troll he really is. Most corporate bosses in this position would have long ago figured out how to play nicely with others, and manipulated the process to minimize damage to their business; now, he'll be lucky when the private-partnership comes around if his application to operate this new project isn't thrown in the trash as soon as they get. Meh. That's what he gets for being a spiteful little turd and acting out like a petulant child. He's not only been a bad neighbor for decades, but he's now made it so that his companies are toxic when dealing with local, state, and the federal governments. He's done more to damage the reputation of his company than anyone else, and I feel bad for his employees when he's gone seeing as the steamy pile he'll have left them to try and rehabilitate.

**bailey** · April-06-11, 07:50 AM

Originally Posted by CLAUDE G

I don't think a second bridge is needed either, however here is why I support Mauroon...

#1 The current bridge is almost 80 years old. Eventhough I feel the Ambassador bridge is well maintained, if anything happens to that bridge we are all screwed. The big trucks are too big to use the Tunnel, and the traffic backups to use the tunnel are going to be insane.

I aint going to wait an hour or more to visit Windsor, and im deffinitly not going to drive to Port Huron to use the blue water bridge

#2 The approach ramps are already built for a second span of the Ambassador Bridge.

#3 The land that the second bridge will be built on is probably already accuired, or the rest of the land can be accuired cheaply since there is no major demolition that will need to take place.

#4 A second bridge will reduce traffic wait times to get to and from Canada.

#5 Its being built with Private money

The only issue I can see with a second span of the Ambassador bridge is that if we had a terrorist attack, is that it could damage the other bridge.

Again claude, those may or may not be issues to consider, but you are ignoring that man you are claiming has the desire to build a bridge is running wall to wall ads that a second span is not necessary at all. If it's not necessary, they why build it at all?

**maxx** · October-04-11, 12:14 PM

If the bridge is not going to be profitable, as Maroun's reps say, I have to wonder why Matty wants it so badly. Could it be a question of power? If he builds it and they do not come, he can always offer to sell it to the state or destroy it. That way he has the upper hand.

**Detroitnerd** · October-04-11, 12:17 PM

Roadway capacity induces demand. The more roadway capacity you build, the more traffic you get. The more traffic you get, the more money you make. Though it's likely he'd still make as much money if the other crossing were built, he wants to make ALL the money.

**Scottathew** · October-04-11, 12:54 PM

Originally Posted by Detroitnerd

he wants to make ALL the money.

Yup, and there's no limit to the lies he'll employ to get all the money.

He says he cares so much about Delray, but then why does he buy up all the Delray houses he can get his hands on and leave them vacant?

**kraig** · October-04-11, 12:56 PM

Originally Posted by EL Jimbo

The people supporting Manny are ignoring a VERY important fact. Moroun has made such a bad name for himself in Windsor that the Canadians simply won't work with him. Either the public bridge gets built, or NO bridge gets built. That's why this whole discussion about Moroun is pretty pointless in my opinion. He's simply trying to be obstructionist because this new bridge potentially will cut into HIS profits. This whole facade he's running has nothing to do with the well-being of the people on either side of the river.

He's probably trying to wait everyone out. Believe it or not, at one point, all parties were onboard with Maroun building the second span. The Gateway project was originally designed with a second span in mind. But then a different set of politicians came along and listened to the Corridano Group's idea to have a separate bridge built. Knowing that a second span by Maroun would torpedo that idea, Matty's bridge plans were then blocked. He's simply doing the same thing to them that was done to him and hoping for a friendlier, at least to him, group of politicians to come in at a latter date.

**kraig** · October-04-11, 01:02 PM

Originally Posted by 48091

Yup, and there's no limit to the lies he'll employ to get all the money.

He says he cares so much about Delray, but then why does he buy up all the Delray houses he can get his hands on and leave them vacant?

As we all know, he couldn't care less. But if he owns the land that the DRIC needs, they can pretty much hang it up. He's got the loot to fight them in court. And Canada can't give them the money for that.

**Detroitnerd** · October-04-11, 01:03 PM

I believe I had heard it was 2001 that changed plans. Destroying the trade link between the U.S. and Canada could be accomplished easily unless there were another span. A twin span is just as vulnerable, so there has to be another span at another point on the river.

**kraig** · October-04-11, 01:11 PM

Originally Posted by Detroitnerd

I believe I had heard it was 2001 that changed plans. Destroying the trade link between the U.S. and Canada could be accomplished easily unless there were another span. A twin span is just as vulnerable, so there has to be another span at another point on the river.

If that were the case, there wouldn't be a need to deny his second span. We all know Matty's trying to make all of the money he can. But, he's not the only one. And if it was a safety issue, there would be more security provided to protect both ends of the Ambassador Bridge.

**Scottathew** · October-04-11, 01:13 PM

Originally Posted by kraig

As we all know, he couldn't care less. But if he owns the land that the DRIC needs, they can pretty much hang it up. He's got the loot to fight them in court. And Canada can't give them the money for that.

I don't think that matters too much. A little eminent domain will take care of that problem. I do feel bad for any folks that do live there and want to stay. It's a pretty sad neighborhood, but sometimes folks want to hang onto a house they've been in for decades.

It's an unfortunate sacrifice, but without eminent domain we wouldn't have the Interstate freeway system.

**Scottathew** · October-04-11, 01:15 PM

Originally Posted by Detroitnerd

I believe I had heard it was 2001 that changed plans. Destroying the trade link between the U.S. and Canada could be accomplished easily unless there were another span. A twin span is just as vulnerable, so there has to be another span at another point on the river.

Beyond redundancy from threat, route redundancy would help us more easily accomplish projects like the Gateway project with less impact.

Also, let's step outside of our US bubble for a moment and think about the positive effect for Windsor and not having more and more traffic dumped off into an already saturated area.

There's just too darn many positives to the NITC project to let a single man hold this up.

**kraig** · October-04-11, 01:23 PM

Originally Posted by 48091

I don't think that matters too much. A little eminent domain will take care of that problem. I do feel bad for any folks that do live there and want to stay. It's a pretty sad neighborhood, but sometimes folks want to hang onto a house they've been in for decades.

It's an unfortunate sacrifice, but without eminent domain we wouldn't have the Interstate freeway system.

Eminent domain against a billionaire who is able to make the claim that his company is trying to provide the same service to the public will be almost impossible. Think in terms of trying to put the Poletown Plant on land owned by Chrysler at the exact same time that Chrysler was being denied the opportunity to build a plant in a nearby location.

**Detroitnerd** · October-04-11, 01:33 PM

Originally Posted by kraig

If that were the case, there wouldn't be a need to deny his second span. We all know Matty's trying to make all of the money he can. But, he's not the only one. And if it was a safety issue, there would be more security provided to protect both ends of the Ambassador Bridge.

I'm just explaining the reasoning I recall for wanting another crossing at a separate location rather than merely twinning Matty's span.

**kraig** · October-04-11, 01:45 PM

Originally Posted by Detroitnerd

I'm just explaining the reasoning I recall for wanting another crossing at a separate location rather than merely twinning Matty's span.

I know, I'm not disagreeing with what you're saying. I'm just saying that there was more to it than just in response to the terrorists attacks. The 911 aspect was simply the DRIC sides spin for the project. Both sides, the DRIC and Maroun, have embelished, distorted and concealed facts in order to suit their purposes.

**Detroitnerd** · October-04-11, 01:53 PM

Originally Posted by kraig

I know, I'm not disagreeing with what you're saying. I'm just saying that there was more to it than just in response to the terrorists attacks. The 911 aspect was simply the DRIC sides spin for the project. Both sides, the DRIC and Maroun, have embelished, distorted and concealed facts in order to suit their purposes.

Ha. Maroun? Lie? Awww, you gotta be KIDDIN' me.