Tag Archives: Mickey Blashfield

Does Anyone Trust Moroun?

Posted on by

wdr-banner-urban-blight-eddison

Ambassador Bridge wants to improve west Windsor
Bridge company president Dan Stamper says he wants to discuss improvements to west end

CBC News

The Ambassador Bridge company wants a meeting with Windsor mayor Eddie Francis and city council.

The bridge company owns more than 150 properties in the city’s west end and it says it wants to discuss improvements to the neighbourhood.

Bridge president Dan Stamper said in a letter that he’s tired of fighting and thinks it’s possible to put down “the swords” and accomplish good things for Windsor.

Francis said the only way a meeting will happen is if the bridge executive agrees not to talk about building a second span.

“It’s the Ambassador Bridge doing what the Ambassador Bridge does. It says one thing and does and acts completely opposite of what they say their intentions are,” Francis alleges. “The ball is in their court. We got a number of other priorities on out list that keep us busy and focused but we are going to continue to protect the interests of this community and we are going to continue to ensure that the public interest is maintained.”

Francis said he will not formally respond to the letter.

He and Stamper did meet earlier in the year, but there was no agreement.

Coun. Ron Jones, who represents the west end, doesn’t believe the bridge will ever get the necessary permits to build a second span.

He said any type of meeting would have to involve the community in a public forum.

“I want to discuss the boarded up houses in west Windsor. I want to talk about routes, about hazardous materials, there’s a pile of things we can talk about at that meeting,” Jones said. “But the public has a right to know.”

Suits seen as unlikely roadblocks to bridge

Posted on by

Permit in hand, but fight continues

By Bill Shea and Dustin Walsh

Crain’s Detroit Business

Legal challenges thrown up to block a second Detroit River bridge are more speed bumps than roadblocks, at least according to Gov. Rick Snyder.

The state “has a winning track record” in defeating such lawsuits, he said Friday after announcing the U.S. Department of State had approved the critical presidential permit needed to advance the $2.1 billion New International Trade Crossing linking the highways in Detroit and Windsor. And they won’t halt its construction.

TRADE CROSSING FAQS

• The New International Trade Crossing is estimated to cost $2.1 billion. The I-75 highway interchange was predicted in 2010 to cost $385.9 million, and the U.S. plaza, $413.6 million. The nearly $1 billion bridge itself would be financed by Canada through a private-sector concessionaire, and the remainder of the $2.1 billion price tag is on the Canadian side of the project.
• Canada has pledged to cover any construction and operational deficits. It also will cover all capital costs on the Michigan side of the project, including $264 million that project organizers want the U.S. government to pay for. If Ottawa and Washington can’t reach a deal on that cost, Canada will pay it.
• Under a deal reached in June 2012 among the Michigan, Ontario and Canadian federal governments, a Canadian company called the Crossing Authority will be in charge of the design, construction, finance, operation and maintenance of the six-lane bridge, which it is expected to bid out under public-private partnership deal to a private company for a 40- or 50-year concession.
• All of Michigan’s share of the crossing tolls will go to Canada to pay back its costs. The state will not receive any toll revenue until that money is paid back and after the concession agreement ends in four or five decades.
• Tolls will be determined by the private-sector concessionaire during the bidding process. However, the models used by MDOT to justify need for the new span are predicated on using the same toll rates as the Ambassador Bridge.
• The Crossing Authority will fall under a joint authority, and half the bridge will be owned by Michigan and half by Canada.
• The deal was swung by Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder with Canada to bypass the Michigan Legislature, which balked at approving any money for the bridge project because of concerns about its necessity — border traffic has declined since 2001 — and whether it would unfairly affect the competing privately-owned Ambassador Bridge.
• Backers tout the new jobs and increased trade they predict the span will fuel. Snyder said the project will create 12,000 direct jobs and as many as 31,000 indirect jobs.
• Supporters also say the bridge will eliminate a traffic bottleneck at the border, and provide redundancy for the Ambassador Bridge two miles away.
• The Detroit-Windsor border — which encompasses the bridge, a tunnel and ferries — is the busiest in North America and carries a quarter of all U.S. trade with Canada, which was $120 billion last year.

Source: State of Michigan, Crain’s research

“I view (such lawsuits) as unfortunate because it takes away resources from the state,” Snyder said after a news conference in Detroit at which he and others touted the permit and bridge project.

The leading opponent of the project is Ambassador Bridge owner Manuel “Matty” Moroun, the commercial trucking industrialist who has said the new span will bankrupt his bridge by taking lucrative commercial truck traffic. He’s owned the bridge since 1979.

Moroun’s Detroit International Bridge Co. and Canadian Transit Co. in February filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., against the U.S. and Canadian governments and other agencies, arguing they don’t have the authority to approve the bridge permit.

Mickey Blashfield, the DIBC’s director of governmental relations, declined to comment Friday.

Also suing to halt the project is State Rep. Fred Durhal, D-Detroit, who is challenging the state’s right to create the agreement it has with Canada that governs how the span will be built, owned and operated.

Durhal has links to Moroun: He previously received $7,000 in campaign contributions from the Moroun family, and his attorney, Godfrey Dillard, used to work for the Ambassador Bridge owner, MLive.com reported on April 9.

Observers say the lawsuits are last-gasp delaying tactics that have little hope of postponing the inevitable for more than a few months.

Click here to read the full story.

Jarvis: ‘King of the world!’

Posted on by

Moroun has lost a lot of lawsuits the last several years. But even when he loses, he wins, because every day he staves off construction of the new bridge, he maintains his lucrative monopoly.

The Windsor Star

Anne Jarvis

It is a pivotal point in the long and controversial quest for a new bridge at the busiest commercial border crossing in North America: Michigan Governor Rick Snyder will announce at a news conference in Detroit today that U.S. President Barack Obama has signed the permit to build the new government bridge between Windsor’s Brighton Beach and Delray in west Detroit.

The permit is the last approval required. But will it be the end of the epic battle between the governments of two countries, one province, one state and an 85-year-old man, Matty Moroun, owner of the competing Ambassador Bridge? Even before the permit was signed, it was reported that Moroun was already seeking an injunction against it so a court can hear his latest lawsuit.

A “perpetual and exclusive franchise right.” That’s what Moroun claims in the lawsuit against the U.S. and Canadian governments.

The government can’t build its planned new bridge over the Detroit River because Moroun’s monopoly is sacrosanct. He has supreme and almighty power until the end of time over one of the most important border crossings in the world, key to the economies of two nations and the jobs and livelihoods of tens of thousands of people.

That’s what Moroun is arguing.

Picture the slightly stooped octogenarian leaning over the rail at the centre of his bridge, arms spread a la Leonardo DiCaprio in the movie Titanic, wisps of white hair blowing in the wind: “I’m the king of the world!”

The absurd claim drew a rare good line from Windsor West MP Brian Masse.

“What’s their next step – declaring themselves as their own independent country?” he quipped to The Windsor Star’s Dave Battagello.

After the permit is dealt with, the next step is for Canada, which is paying for the crossing, to start acquiring land. Much of the property needed is owned by, yes, Moroun. It will probably have to be expropriated. And yes, there will indubitably be more lawsuits over that.

Moroun has lost a lot of lawsuits the last several years. But even when he loses, he wins, because every day he staves off construction of the new bridge, he maintains his lucrative monopoly. But get this; the irony is too much: his latest lawsuit, according to a report in The Detroit Free Press, also seeks to stop the U.S. government from delaying approval of the Ambassador Bridge’s proposed twin span.

A Democratic state representative from Detroit has also filed a lawsuit claiming Snyder had no legal right to sign an agreement with Prime Minister Stephen Harper last June to build the new bridge.

Rep. Fred Durhal has received more than $7,000 in campaign contributions from Moroun’s family since 2010. Could that explain his lawsuit? As rich as he is, Moroun doesn’t give money to politicians for nothing. He gives money to politicians to further his interests. By the way, Durhal is running for mayor of Detroit. Elections in the U.S. are expensive. This lawsuit should earn him more campaign contributions from Moroun. (Voters in Detroit should pay attention. The city needs a mayor to represent  its best interests, not the interests of the billionaire who installs the mayor in office.)

And it can’t escape notice that Durhal’s lawyer is Godfrey Dillard. I remember Dillard well from that stunning day when Judge Prentis Edwards of the Third Circuit Court sent Moroun to jail for contempt in flouting an order to complete his share of a highway project with the state. Dillard was Moroun’s lawyer. Quite a coincidence he’s Durhal’s lawyer, too.

Snyder bypassed the legislature to sign the agreement to build the new bridge because he couldn’t get the votes he needed in the Senate, Durhal told the Detroit News. But, as the governor’s office pointed out, that’s not true. The issue was never put to a vote. It never got past the Senate’s economic development committee. The three members of the committee who voted it down got money from Moroun, either directly or from political action committees that got money from him. One got $4,000 directly and another got $535,767 from political action committees.

Durhal also argued that the governor can’t commit the state to pay for a bridge without the approval of legislators. Except, Michigan isn’t paying for the bridge. Canada is. We’re paying the state’s share of $550 million, to be repaid through tolls.

What motivates a person like Moroun? A perennial member of Forbes Magazine’s list of the richest people in the world, with an estimated net worth of $1.1 billion, he has far more money than one person could reasonably spend. He lords over a business empire. He could have worked with government and played a major role in securing the new bridge. He could have been heralded as a forward-thinking businessman who helped usher North American trade into the new century. Instead, his legacy will be this: the man who trampled all over people, busting up neighbourhoods on both sides of the border, in relentless pursuit of his monopoly.

Podcast: Are River Crossing Lawsuits a “Bridge Too Far”?

Posted on by

Michigan is still waiting for a presidential permit to move ahead with construction of a new bridge between Detroit and Windsor. Meanwhile, a pair of lawsuits have been filed to stop the project. One suit was filed by the owners of the Ambassador Bridge. The other was filed by Detroit mayoral candidate Fred Durhal, a state lawmaker who says Governor Rick Snyder is illegally sidestepping the Legislature. WDET’s Pat Batcheller asked Canadian Consul General Roy Norton when he expects the presidential permit to be granted, and whether there’s any indication that it won’t be. Click here to listen the conversation.

Moroun sues to protect Ambassador Bridge monopoly

Posted on by

In the lawsuit, the Detroit International Bridge Co., the family business controlled by Manuel (Matty) Moroun that owns the 84-year-old Ambassador Bridge, claims a “perpetual and exclusive franchise right” to operate the crossing free of competition from another span.

Matty Moroun’s company sues U.S. leaders, Canada to stop competing span

By Todd Spangler
Detroit Free Press Washington Staff

WASHINGTON – The owner of the Ambassador Bridge has filed a lawsuit against a number of federal officials — the U.S. secretaries of state, transportation and homeland security among them — and the Canadian government as the company tries to block the building of a rival Detroit River bridge, and force approval for its own second span to Windsor.

The new complaint, now quietly winding its way through federal court in Washington, D.C., was filed in February but was dated Nov. 9, just three days after last year’s referendum in which Michigan voters rejected a constitutional amendment that would have required a statewide and local vote before the state spent any money on a new international bridge or tunnel to Canada.

In the lawsuit, the Detroit International Bridge Co., the family business controlled by Manuel (Matty) Moroun that owns the 84-year-old Ambassador Bridge, claims a “perpetual and exclusive franchise right” to operate the crossing free of competition from another span. It says the proposed New International Trade Crossing would “destroy” the value of its franchise, and argues that the process by which the State Department would approve a deal between Michigan and Canada to build the rival bridge is unconstitutional.

“No one’s ever argued it. It’s never really come up,” said Hamish Hume, a lawyer at Boies, Schiller & Flexner in Washington, which represents the bridge company. His argument: A 1972 act giving the State Department authority to approve international bridges is unconstitutional because Congress never spelled out, as Hume says it needed to, what principle to use in making its decisions.

A decision on the presidential permit needed to move forward on the NITC bridge could be announced at any time by Secretary of State John Kerry, but the bridge company already is seeking an injunction against such a permit. It will be weeks, however, before all the various agencies named in the complaint — which was added to a lawsuit involving the Coast Guard filed three years ago — respond to the court.

Most of those involved declined to talk at length about the lawsuit, though Gary Doer, Canada’s ambassador to the U.S., said he is “confident of both the merits and the legality of the (NITC) bridge.”

Ken Silfven, spokesman for Gov. Rick Snyder, said the complaint “is nothing that we didn’t anticipate.”

“We expected these delay tactics based on their track record,” he said. “After all is said and done, though, the bridge will be built.”

The bridge company is looking for a judgment that its franchise rights are “exclusive of all contiguous and injurious competition in the form of any other bridge between Detroit and Windsor” and to stop other agencies, including those coming under Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, from putting up obstacles or otherwise delaying approvals for a second Ambassador Bridge span.

As of last week, State Department personnel said officials were still working on the NITC application, noting some 15,000 comments had been received on it. The lawsuit, they said, had no bearing on the timing of a decision.

Government lawyers declined to talk about the complaint, but made clear in court filings their position that the process for issuing a presidential permit — a responsibility granted to the executive branch by Congress in 1972 — meets constitutional muster. In filings, they called the bridge company’s arguments “futile.”

Hume said if the State Department were to issue a permit to the NITC, the bridge company would look to a judge to block it under the points raised in the complaint.

“It’s pretty obvious they (the bridge company) are throwing whatever they can at the wall and hope something sticks,” said Andrew Finn, an expert on Canada and border policy at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington.

But Finn didn’t completely reject what he called “the closer question” of a lawsuit against the State Department should it approve a presidential permit for the new rival bridge. Besides the constitutional question, the argument would be that while Congress gave the president authority to approve international crossings in 1972, the creation of the Ambassador Bridge predates that, with legislation passed by both Congress and the Canadian parliament in 1921.

The bridge company also has taken the position that those acts were tantamount to a treaty and created a franchise that can’t be destroyed without superseding acts by both legislatures, despite the fact that dozens of presidential permits have been issued over the years.

“I think what they’re saying is, we’re special and this is the one place you can’t do it,” Finn said. He didn’t find the argument convincing, but said it’s always possible a judge could disagree.

Certainly, the case has settled into a more esoteric part of the law. Few experts could be found with experience in litigating such a question regarding an international crossing and Hume acknowledged there have been few bridge permits granted in cases like this for agreements between a state and a foreign power, which he argues are prohibited.

In the 1980s, the owner of a bridge in Presidio, Texas, failed in his attempt to get the Supreme Court to block a neighboring bridge from being built, though some of the claims raised were different than those here.

The Canadian government has offered to pay Michigan’s $550-million share of the $2.1-billion overall cost of the NITC bridge, but the complaint said there is no economic justification for the new bridge.

The bridge company argues in the complaint that 75% of its truck traffic and 40% of its passenger traffic could be diverted to the new bridge, reflecting “a long-standing desire on the part of the Canadian government to eliminate private ownership of the Detroit-Windsor bridge crossing.”

Also in February, state Rep. Fred Durhal, D-Detroit, filed a lawsuit in Ingham County against Snyder, claiming the governor can’t enter into an agreement with Canada without legislative approval.

Moroun’s lawyers are back at it with new lawsuit

Posted on by

State rep sues to overturn Snyder-Canada bridge deal

By Chad Livengood
Detroit News Lansing Bureau

Lansing — A state lawmaker from Detroit is seeking to derail Gov. Rick Snyder’s partnership with the Canadian government to build a Detroit River bridge to Windsor.

Rep. Fred Durhal, D-Detroit, recently filed a lawsuit in Ingham County Circuit Court challenging Snyder’s legal authority to enter into an agreement with Canada without the Legislature’s approval.

Durhal announced the suit Friday.

After legislation authorizing a new bridge failed to get out of a Senate committee in 2011, Snyder bypassed the Legislature and signed a deal with Canadian officials last June that calls for Canada to build a $2.1 billion bridge from Windsor to southwest Detroit.

Canada agreed to front Michigan’s $550 million share of the cost, which will have to be repaid through toll revenue. The Canadians also pledged to reimburse Michigan for any expenses the state Department of Transportation incurs in connecting the new bridge to Interstate 75 through a new international plaza.

Durhal’s complaint contends Snyder has violated constitutional separation of powers and committed the state to eventually paying for the bridge without approval of the Legislature, which controls the purse strings of state government.

“The governor has circumvented the Michigan constitution in order to achieve through the side door what he couldn’t through the front door,” Durhal said Friday.

“Because he couldn’t get the votes he needed in the Senate to get it done, he’s going around the Legislature to create this agreement that the Legislature has no input whatsoever in.”

Snyder has said he had authority to enter into the agreement without the Legislature’s permission under the Urban Cooperation Act and state constitution.

“The Legislature was clear that it didn’t want to take up the issue, and that’s fine,” Snyder spokesman Ken Silfven said. “We respect the fact that (the Legislature) has a full plate of other issues to deal with.”

The Snyder administration is waiting for a presidential permit from the federal government before construction of the New International Trade Crossing can begin.

Durhal, who is running for mayor of Detroit, denied Friday he filed the lawsuit to draw attention to his campaign. “This is not for political reasons,” he said.

Durhal’s lawyer, Godfrey Dillard, has worked for Ambassador Bridge owner Manuel “Matty” Moroun, who has waged a multi-million dollar political campaign to stop construction of a crossing that would compete for truck traffic with his 86-year-old bridge.

Durhal denied he’s suing Snyder at the behest of the billionaire trucking mogul.

MOVING FORWARD: New International Trade Crossing will have huge implications for southeastern Michigan

Posted on by

Advisor & Source (sourcenewspapers.com)

By Jim Kasuba
Journal Register News Service

DETROIT — After more than a decade of debate, public meetings and political campaigns for and against it, a new international bridge is on the horizon.

To be certain, the controversy over whether or not to build the New International Trade Crossing, a publicly funded bridge project between Windsor and Detroit, will continue until the first ceremonial shovel hits the ground, and most likely beyond that point.

But governments on both sides of the American-Canadian border have completed their due diligence and it appears only a matter of months until that ceremonial ground-breaking will take place about a mile south of the privately owned Ambassador Bridge, which also links the United States and Canada.

In November, Michigan voters roundly rejected Proposal 6, a ballot measure that would have required voter approval of any new state-backed international bridges or tunnels. That proposal went down in flames despite a huge spending gap between the Detroit International Bridge Co., which bankrolled the petition drive that put the measure on the ballot, and the anti-Proposal 6 group. By comparison, the $1 million spent by those against Proposal 6 was a paltry sum when going up against the $31.7 million the bridge company spent trying to convince voters to approve it.

Gov. Rick Snyder said in published reports that with the defeat of the proposal, the state can now begin to move forward on the NITC, which formerly went by the name of the Detroit River International Crossing, commonly referred to as DRIC.

The new bridge would connect Windsor’s 401 Highway and I-75 in Detroit’s Delray neighborhood. Those close to the project say the next step is to get a “presidential permit,” which could happen by summer. However, with all of the delays that have occurred up to this point, no one is placing bets on a timeline. Once bridge construction gets started, the project is anticipated to be completed within five to seven years.

Mohammed Alghurabi, who served as the Michigan Department of Transportation’s senior project manager of the project when it was known as DRIC, said it’s his understanding that the permit is expected to be approved, but the exact time frame is uncertain. The permit falls under the purview of the U.S. State Department.

“The biggest hurdle (in getting the presidential permit approved) is making sure all the ‘i’s are dotted and ‘t’s are crossed when it comes to environmental clearance,” Alghurabi said. “The No. 2 issue is that they want to know about the funding.”

Up to this point, one of the biggest obstacles to getting the project started has been Detroit International Bridge Co. owner Manuel “Matty” Moroun, who has vowed to continue fighting it.

Company spokesman Mickey Blashfield did not return a phone call and email seeking comment for this report.

However, shortly after voters failed to approve the DIBC-backed Proposal 6, Blashfield told The Detroit News that the fight over the new bridge would continue.

“If the governmental proposal doesn’t collapse from the weight of legal and legislative scrutiny, the unstable salt mine foundations (of Snyder’s bridge) will present some serious obstacles, which should call the entire project into question,” Blashfield said. “Similar and serious financial, legal and logistical questions have already been raised regarding the viability of the NITC — questions Gov. Snyder and his administration have still refused to answer directly.”

Government officials have dismissed the salt mine issue as baseless. The new bridge, if built, would compete with the DIBC-owned Ambassador Bridge and has been the source of contention between the state and Moroun’s company for years. There have been nearly 30 lawsuits between the two sides over either the NITC or issues at the Ambassador Bridge.

State Rep. Douglas Geiss (D-Taylor), who in January 2011 reintroduced legislation to authorize construction of the new bridge, doesn’t believe Moroun will put an end to his lawsuits anytime soon.

“No amount of data or facts will sway Matty Moroun’s argument,” Geiss said. “He will say or do anything to delay construction of a bridge. The longer he delays, the more money he makes.”

Geiss cited figures estimating that the Ambassador Bridge gains about $60 million per year for each year it’s the only bridge between Detroit and Windsor, which is one reason Moroun’s critics say the billionaire can easily afford attorney fees to keep fighting the NITC. However, those same critics believe spending on TV commercials, the seemingly never-ending court battles and donations to the campaigns of various politicians throughout the state are reasons it now costs $4.75 for a passenger car to cross the bridge, the fee that went into effect May 1, 2012.

Geiss uses the Mackinac Bridge, which connects Michigan’s Upper and Lower peninsulas, as a prime example of an authority that knows how to oversee a bridge.

“People say that an authority can’t run a bridge, but that’s how the Mackinac Bridge is run,” Geiss said. “The Mackinac Bridge is in top-notch condition. They do continual work on the bridge, they have an exemplary safety record and it’s a much more difficult bridge to maintain.”

He also added that it’s cheaper to use the Mackinac Bridge than it is to use the Ambassador Bridge. The current toll passenger cars pay for the Mackinac Bridge is $4 per car.

Featured prominently on the Ambassador Bridge’s website is an article by “Corps!,” a publication that brands itself “Everything Business.” In an article dated Sept. 8, 2011, Matthew Moroun, the son of the bridge’s owner and vice chairman of his family’s business, spoke out against a new bridge.

In the article, Moroun scoffed at the financial case made by Canadian and Michigan officials for the $2.1 billion NITC, calling it “political math,” adding that a taxpayer treasury is needed to make this kind of project work.

However, Geiss and other bridge proponents say the NITC will be built at no cost to Michigan taxpayers. Canada has agreed to front the cost of construction and expects to recoup that money through toll collections.

Geiss sees the fact that the Canadian government is willing to spend up to $550 million to cover the costs of the U.S. portion of the project as proof that it views this second bridge as critical.

But the money fronted by the Canadians goes much further when taking into consideration that the Federal Highway Administration is allowing Canada’s expenditure for the NITC project to be used to secure federal matching funds.

According to Alghurabi, the state of Michigan appears to be on solid ground in the funding area when it comes to its presidential permit application, since the Canadian government has agreed to front the money.

One argument the Ambassador Bridge owners have made against the proposed new bridge is that there isn’t enough traffic to support it. In the “Corps!” article, Moroun said that traffic peaked in 1999 when almost 12.4 million vehicles crossed the bridge. In 2010, that number was down to 7.2 million vehicles.

Assuming a 3 percent compound annual growth rate, it would take 19 years for the Ambassador Bridge to achieve its former peak.

Even with the projections being what they are, Moroun’s company still has plans to add a second span to the Ambassador Bridge, at a projected cost of $1 billion, that would add even more capacity. On the home page of the Ambassador Bridge’s website is a photo of the bridge as it looks today, along with an artist’s rendering of what it would look like with a second span, labeled “tomorrow.”

Moroun said his company hasn’t given up on the idea of a second span, and that it will take place “sometime in the future.” He added that when the second span is opened, the old span would undergo renovations before reopening to traffic. In terms of the economics, Moroun said it’s much more expensive to repair and rehabilitate the bridge when it’s under traffic load.

In the fall, Canadian Consul General Roy Norton spoke to the Dearborn Chamber of Commerce and to the Southern Wayne County Regional Chamber about the economic importance of a second bridge between the two major border cities.

Norton said the project is critical to maintaining the free flow of goods along the Detroit-Windsor corridor. One-quarter of the $689 billion in trade between Canada and the United States in 2011 passed over the Ambassador Bridge. Although not believed to be obsolete, the now 84-year-old bridge is the only freight crossing between Detroit and Windsor, with the next closest 60 miles to the north at the Blue Water Bridge, which crosses near Port Huron to Sarnia, Ontario.

Norton said the age of the Ambassador Bridge coupled with increasing tolls and traffic volume are the reasons Canada stepped up to finance a $550 million freeway interchange on the Michigan side of the NITC.

The Canadian government’s agreement to pay for cash-strapped Michigan’s portion of the project is one of the most unique aspects of the deal, and in all likelihood a second bridge would not be possible without it.

Norton said that since 1972, when Congress put the responsibility of U.S.-Canada border crossings on states rather than the federal government, every project has been jointly financed by the Canadian government and the state the crossing is in.

“Maintaining a death watch on an 83-year-old bridge and crossing our fingers for its eternal life didn’t seem like a very sound way to proceed,” Norton said.

He also answered critics who say another bridge isn’t necessary because traffic counts on the Ambassador Bridge are down. Norton said that while traffic counts are lower relative to all-time highs, they’re quickly rebounding from the global economic crisis of 2008 and are projected to continue growing.

But traffic issues aside, Norton said the critics’ argument doesn’t address that the Ambassador Bridge is aging and the fact that it is the sole crossing at the Detroit-Windsor trade nexus.

The DIBC has made public statements criticizing the use of public money to build a second international bridge, saying that it should be the private sector taking the lead. Norton said that, in fact, the bridge will be built and financed by a private contractor and in the event toll projections don’t live up to expectations, the Canadian government is the party that stands to lose.

Geiss also emphasizes the fact that this bridge is a public-private partnership. A private company will bid to build and maintain the bridge for a period of years, most likely a 30-year contract, he said.

“These companies believe they can recoup their investment, plus make a profit,” Geiss said. “The people of the state of Michigan can feel a further sense that they will not be in a position that they will have to pay back the cost of the bridge. If it is not a good business model, you would get zero proposals from private industry. We don’t expect that to happen. If you get three or four proposals, (the project) has been well-vetted.”

The other point to take into consideration, supporters say, is the bottleneck created at the Ambassador Bridge, especially at the Canadian side. Once the traffic reaches Windsor, drivers are faced with 16 stoplights before reaching the highway. Geiss said that would be akin to dropping off traffic on Telegraph Road in the Downriver area, using several miles of local roads and facing numerous traffic lights before reaching the freeway, tying up traffic along the way.

“You may not see it when you go to the bridge, but Ford, GM and Chrysler monitor that crossing,” Geiss said. “If it gets backed up, they will divert to the Blue Water Bridge or another crossing. The economic engine of Michigan and Ontario is tied to that crossing.”

Although the building of a second Detroit-Windsor bridge has far-reaching implications for the entire region, no particular group of residents will feel the impact more than the residents of Delray, the southwest Detroit neighborhood just north of River Rouge that extends east to the Detroit River, west to Fort Street and I-75, and north to Dragoon Street at Fort Wayne.

The once-thriving community of 30,000 people in the 1930s has shrunk to about 3,000 people today, an area of numerous burned-out and abandoned buildings populated by a tough group of people who remain in Delray for a variety of reasons.

“There are people who want to live here because they have generations of family who grew up here, or because it’s close to the river, or close to their jobs,” said Scott Brines, president of the Community Benefits Coalition, a grass-roots organization formed to protect residents from the potentially harmful impact a second bridge would inflict upon the Delray neighborhood. “We need to take care of people close to transportation and heavy industry. People are going to live here no matter what.”

Brines said the coalition is composed of about 500 residents, businesses, churches and organizations who stand united that when the project gains final approval, either the residents be offered buyouts — all of them, not just those in the footprint of the bridge — or else an investment be made in the neighborhood, one that targets air quality, abandoned buildings and city services.

For years, Delray residents involved in the preservation and improvement of their neighborhood have taken part in monthly community meetings hosted by the Michigan Department of Transportation, meetings that offered information about the bridge project as it proceeded through various stages of planning, and seeking input as to how the building of a new bridge could take concerns of Delray residents to heart.

Brines and other Delray residents are no Pollyannas. They realize that a project of this magnitude is going to have some negative impacts on their neighborhood, but one of their goals is to look for solutions that will lessen those impacts, such as increased air pollution from idling trucks. The coalition believes the new bridge and Delray residents can mutually coexist and even benefit from one another.

One of the suggestions his group has made to bridge planners is that they go directly to the source of pollution by requiring that trucks be retrofitted so they produce less pollution.

“In (Los Angeles) ports private developers retrofitted trucks and it took 90 percent of the particulate out of the air,” Brines said. “You can give a credit for new or retrofitted engines and if not they will pay a little more. This would greatly help the community.”

One of the reasons bridge proponents say Delray may not be left to languish has to do with improving the image of Michigan. The last thing bridge builders want to do, they argue, is to build a beautiful new bridge that connects to a slum neighborhood, which is the last view travelers see when they leave the state and the first image when they enter it.

“It’s a black eye on Michigan and Detroit,” Brines said. “How could you let that happen? When you go across the river, Canada has taken great strides to improve the quality of life and the environment to make the area beautiful.”

Brines said the hope is if the government won’t step in to improve and beautify the area, perhaps the bridge’s private developer will. Many Delray residents feel abandoned by the city of Detroit, he said, and don’t hold out a lot of hope that the financially strapped city will put much effort into neighborhood improvements.

“We are dealing with a city in crisis,” Brines said. “We have so many houses that are abandoned — houses that are burned and ravaged, and stripped of their resources. We’ve also had lot of speculators, businesses buying up properties, one of which is the (Detroit International) Bridge Co.”

Right now, Delray finds itself like everyone else with a stake in the bridge — waiting on approval of the presidential permit. However, as might be expected, there’s considerably more anticipation with Delray residents surrounding the length of time it will take for final approval.

Brines said the community expects at least five years of the building process.

“That’s a hardship,” Brines said of the lengthy period of increased noise, dust and traffic blockages that are involved in such a major project. “The longer we wait, the worse it gets. A lot of us are struggling to see how we can come out on top.”

Editorial: New job poses conflict questions

Posted on by

LSJ.com

Former state lawmaker Paul Opsommer’s decision to take a job with a company owned by Ambassador Bridge owner Manuel “Matty” Moroun should leave voters with cynical thoughts. They should translate their concern into pressing current lawmakers to pass ethics laws that keep outgoing lawmakers from becoming lobbyists without a cooling-off period of at least a year.

Opsommer, a Republican who had represented the DeWitt area in the House, reached the end of his term-limited time last year. Barely a month after leaving office, he announced last week that he’s taken a governmental affairs position with CenTra Inc., a Moroun family transportation interest, where he will work on policy efforts on both state and federal levels. As chair of the House Transportation committee, Opsommer was an often vocal opponent to efforts to build a new bridge between Detroit and Canada that would compete with the Ambassador Bridge, which is privately owned by the Moroun family through its Detroit International Bridge Co.

Opsommer says he did not take a position with the bridge company to avoid the appearance of impropriety, but it’s hard to see how the public could find much difference. The perception can’t be easily eliminated.

Michigan would be well served to limit senior executive branch officials and lawmakers from jumping directly into lobbying jobs or industry jobs in areas over which they had oversight, such as insurance, health care or transportation. It’s time for reform.

Lobbying oversight needs teeth

Speaking of ethics reforms, Michigan could do a lot to improve its oversight of lobbyists’ spending. An LSJ report this week showed that lobbyists spent some $36.6 million in 2012 to influence public policy in the state, up 3 percent from 2011 and nearly double what was spent in 2001.

The Center for Public Integrity, which did an in-depth state-by-state analysis of ethics, transparency and accountability issues, gave Michigan an overall F grade for integrity and specifically a zero score on key areas of involving lobbyists. A key reason is that while the state has reporting requirements, the center’s review found such reports are not filed frequently enough and are not sufficiently comprehensive. In addition, there are no requirements for auditing lobbyists’ disclosures. And while there is a fine for being late with a filing, there are insufficient penalties for any violations of rules such as spending limits.

Michigan is one of only eight states that got an overall F for in its public integrity score card, and ranked 44th out of 50 states. Again, it’s time for improvement.

An LSJ editorial

DeWitt’s Opsommer takes job with bridge owner Matty Maroun

Posted on by

DeWitt Republican opposed Canada deal

Written by
Paul Egan
Detroit Free Press

The former chairman of the House Transportation Committee said Wednesday that he is going to work for Ambassador Bridge owner Manuel “Matty” Moroun.

And a Democratic state lawmaker who broke with her party in December to cast a key vote for a regional transit authority has landed a job with the Snyder administration.

Paul Opsommer, a DeWitt Republican, had opposed the deal that Gov. Rick Snyder signed with Canada for the New International Trade Crossing. Shanelle Jackson, a Detroit Democrat, started work this week as a $76,500-a-year regional deputy director with the Michigan Department of Transportation. They are among 15 former House members who had to leave the Legislature at the end of 2012 because of term limits.

Opsommer said he will not be working for Moroun’s Detroit International Bridge Co., but instead will be director of government affairs at both the federal and state level for Moroun’s broader transportation and business interests, working for CenTra Inc.

He said he didn’t oppose the public bridge proposed by Snyder, but was concerned by a lack of transparency in the state’s bridge agreement with Canada. Still, Opsommer said he didn’t want to go to work for the bridge company because it could appear inappropriate. But he said he welcomed the challenge of tackling broader issues, such as fixing the road funding problem, at the federal and state level. Moroun spokesman Mickey Blashfield said CenTra wants “to be well-served with someone who knows what’s going on” in transportation.

Bills to authorize the public bridge backed by Snyder and opposed by Moroun never came to a House committee or full chamber vote while Opsommer chaired the House Transportation in 2011-12 because they never emerged from the Senate.

Jackson was one of two Democratic House members who voted yes when legislation to create a regional transit authority for southeast Michigan squeaked through the Legislature on Dec. 6. That’s the day Snyder outraged Democrats by announcing his support for fast-track passage of right-to-work legislation.

Jackson said Wednesday that she took heat from her caucus colleagues over her vote, but in no way believes her job is a reward for helping pass what was a major priority for Snyder.

“It was the right thing to do,” she said. “I had never seen so much opportunity come through for the city of Detroit.”

Jackson will be responsible for outreach to get the transit authority up and running.

Jeff Cranson, a spokesman for MDOT, said Jackson was hired for a two-year contract.

Moroun pays Windsor $1.3 million after losing frivolous lawsuits

Posted on by
Mayor’s secret talks continue with bridge company

The Windsor Star

Doug Schmidt

Make no mistake – as far as the Ambassador Bridge ownership is concerned, the current secret talks between its Canadian Transit Company president and Windsor’s mayor are all about getting government approval for the twinning of its international span.

“Yes … we’re not walking away from that plan, we’re doing everything we can to rev up those plans,” said CTC president Dan Stamper.

The difference now is that, after years of brawling it out in the courts, the owners of the privately owned bridge, the single-richest commercial trade crossing in North America, want to make nice with their Canadian host municipality.

“We’d much rather work with the city than fight the city,” Stamper told The Star.

That’s probably because it’s been a losing fight so far for billionaire bridge owner Matty Moroun. City solicitor George Wilkki said this week that the municipality just received a $1.3-million cheque from the Ambassador Bridge representing court-awarded costs against the company and a residents group led by Hilary Payne that fought alongside it.

“We won the lawsuit — until that point the bridge had little incentive to sit down with us,” said Mayor Eddie Francis, just one of a number of politicians personally named in court actions launched by the owners of the Ambassador Bridge.

But there’s just as big an incentive for the city to sit down, namely to discuss the future of about 100 bridge-owned homes in Olde Sandwich Towne, all vacant and boarded up and representing a large neighbourhood blight.

“The city’s goal is, we want to restore a sense of normal to that neighbourhood,” said Francis.

The question remains, however, as to what the closed-door talks are about and where there might be a meeting of the minds.

“As far as I’m concerned, these discussions have nothing to do with a second bridge span,” said Francis. “Just because the Ambassador Bridge wants something doesn’t mean it’ll happen.”

The bridge company is well aware that the mayor and city council are under enormous political pressure to do something about the ugly neighbourhood eyesore represented by Indian Road and the surrounding collection of abandoned homes. City bylaw officers have been keeping close tabs on the situation, but as long as a private owner continues to pay taxes, tend to the grass and weeds, clean up after fires and vandalism and doesn’t allow the buildings to collapse, there’s little the municipality can do.

Stamper said it would have been his preference to see those homes torn down four years ago. The city hasn’t said no to demolition, but it has long argued the bridge company must first submit a formal plan outlining what it intends to do with property zoned residential and designated for protection under heritage policies upheld by recent court rulings.

Stamper said the several discussions he’s had with Francis so far are about “how to remove those houses that are causing so much aggravation for the community and for us.”

While a second span parallel to the west of the existing bridge is the ultimate goal for CTC, Stamper said the immediate objective is getting municipal and federal approval to expand the existing customs plaza. That’s needed to accommodate secondary inspection of cargo trucks that can currently only occur at an off-site location south on Huron Church Road.

The Ambassador Bridge has acquired properties along Indian Road and elsewhere west of the existing plaza, which Stamper said federal agencies would like to see expanded, but in between lies a stretch of municipally owned Huron Church Road.

“We will not have any discussions that include consideration of closing Huron Church or reconfiguring Huron Church,” said Francis.

One of the carrots being dangled in front of the city is a bundle of approximately 20 of the bridge’s 100 acquired west-side properties that Stamper said the bridge company doesn’t need for its plans. “I’m open to … what the community would like to see,” he said.

But Francis said: “Let’s be clear — they have a long way to go to rebuild the trust of this community.”

While agreeing the mayor should meet and discuss the situation with Stamper, MP Brian Masse (NDP – Windsor West) said the city should be wary given the bridge company’s record. “I don’t see how they should be rewarded, especially after what the neighbourhood has had to endure,” he said.

Masse, who has also had regular run-ins with the bridge company, said he’ll be at Sandwich and Mill Streets on Saturday to protest Canada Post’s proposed closure of its postal outlet at that location. “It didn’t help to lose a hundred households,” he said of the bridge company’s expansion plans, which he also blames for having “a role” in local school and business closures.

The parties involved in the mayor-bridge talks, including a representative of the Canada Border Services Agency in the most recent meeting, aren’t divulging details.

“I do trust the mayor on this issue,” said Ward 2 Coun. Ron Jones.

In an emailed response to a query by The Star, a spokeswoman for the CBSA would only say that it “meets regularly with stakeholders including municipal governments and bridge authorities.”

The owners of the Ambassador Bridge, built in 1929, recently filed an application with Michigan’s Department of Environmental Quality, proposing to take the existing bridge out of service and build a new one “to the west of the existing span bridge.”