The Border From The US Side
I am glad that my interpretation of what is happening in Michigan seems to be similar with what at least one Detroit journal believes is going on after the Michigan Legislature amendments to kill the DRIC funding.
That news PLUS the Presidential Permit position PLUS the Department of State lack of concurrence with the DRIC cental crossing choices PLUS the OMB hearing results that slows down DRTP to a crawl make the Bridge Co's position very strong.
That news PLUS the Presidential Permit position PLUS the Department of State lack of concurrence with the DRIC cental crossing choices PLUS the OMB hearing results that slows down DRTP to a crawl make the Bridge Co's position very strong.
And, notwithstanding the West End activists and politicians, if we on our side do not want to intrude in Sandwich, there is only one place to go now that every other choice has been eliminated! That leaves one problem that our local politicians do not dare deal with. But you know what that is: the road to the border!
Lawmakers threaten border-study funds
Move would put focus back on Ambassador Bridge twinning
By Michelle Martinez, June 19, 2006
State lawmaker concerns over public spending on the next border crossing have pushed a Detroit International Bridge Co. proposal to build a second bridge next to the Ambassador Bridge back into the forefront.
Budget amendments to stop state funding of a binational study on the next border crossing have been approved as part of larger budget bills and await finalization in House-Senate conference committees. The amendments were introduced by State Sen. Jud Gilbert, R-Algonac, and state Rep. Philip LaJoy, R-Canton Township.
Heidi Watson, deputy press secretary for Gov. Jennifer Granholm, said the governor believes the study should be funded, but continues to work with the Legislature on the language.
“Safe and efficient movement across the border is our overriding concern,” Watson said.
About $21.3 million already has been directed to the study, including about $4.26 million from the state. If passed, the amendments would save the state as much as $2.4 million more from the study’s next round of financing.
The study — conducted by the Michigan Department of Transportation and other state, federal and provincial agencies in the U.S. and Canada — was formed to come up with the agencies’ anointed plan for a new crossing by next year. The group discarded “twinning” the bridge, owned by Manuel Moroun, and a plan to convert an aging rail tunnel to truck use late last year to focus on a Delray site for a crossing that could cost taxpayers as much as $1.3 billion.
Gilbert and LaJoy say that tossing the privately funded plan to twin the span would waste $184 million the state is already spending on the Gateway project, which connects the Ambassador Bridge to I-75 and I-96, and hundreds of millions more to build a new bridge.
Funding of the project should be held until privately funded options are put back on the table, Gilbert said.
Bill Shrek, MDOT director of communications, said that the study has yet to determine how the new crossing would be funded and that any money spent by public or private interests would be made back in tolls.
But the legislators say they want more oversight of the process and looking at privately funded options will be a top priority.
That could be a good thing, said John Taylor, an associate professor of marketing and logistics at Grand Valley State University.
The time and dollars spent on the study are “troubling,” he said. Legislative oversight might determine whether a new crossing is even needed. But the push towards private dollars “probably benefits the Ambassador Bridge,” he said. “They own the land.”
The Detroit River Tunnel Partnership still would need to acquire permits and land and negotiate a customs agreement to start work on its $600 million tunnel.
That group is owned by the Canadian Pacific Railway and the Borealis Transportation Infrastructure Trust, the investment arm of the Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System.
The two budget amendments passed the state House and Senate in late May. They are now in conference committee.
Detroit International has the land and approvals to break ground on its $400 million twin span next spring, said Dan Stamper, Detroit International president.
But Detroit International’s plan still won’t go unchallenged. The company is fending off a federal Canadian bill aimed at giving the government more oversight over international crossings and strong community opposition in Windsor to its plans.
Canada’s Bill C-3 wasn’t gunning for the Ambassador Bridge, but would give the Canadian government authority to veto construction or alteration of international bridges, and regulate their maintenance, safety, security and operation, said Mark Butler, a communications officer with Transport Canada, the Canadian equivalent of the U.S. Federal Highway Administration.
Stamper said that Detroit International had been “comforted” by Transport Canada testimony that the bill wouldn’t interfere with its plans to twin its span, but was wary about the “micro-managing” of the bridge that it would allow.
The bill is awaiting final approval in Canadian House of Commons before being moved on to the Canadian Senate for passage. It could be enacted by the governor general by this fall, Butler said.
Transport Canada also isn’t ready to give up on the binational study, Butler said. Should Michigan’s funds dry up, Canada still supports the process.
It’s not clear whether the U.S. Federal Highway Administration feels the same. That agency said it was “not appropriate” to speculate on whether it would continue on with the study until the state takes “definitive action.”
Meanwhile, work on the study continues, Shrek said. The group will start drilling core samples Downriver in a matter of weeks.
“We can’t as a state agency react to laws until they’re passed,” he said. “But as some point (passage of the amendments) would stop the process.”
By Michelle Martinez, June 19, 2006
State lawmaker concerns over public spending on the next border crossing have pushed a Detroit International Bridge Co. proposal to build a second bridge next to the Ambassador Bridge back into the forefront.
Budget amendments to stop state funding of a binational study on the next border crossing have been approved as part of larger budget bills and await finalization in House-Senate conference committees. The amendments were introduced by State Sen. Jud Gilbert, R-Algonac, and state Rep. Philip LaJoy, R-Canton Township.
Heidi Watson, deputy press secretary for Gov. Jennifer Granholm, said the governor believes the study should be funded, but continues to work with the Legislature on the language.
“Safe and efficient movement across the border is our overriding concern,” Watson said.
About $21.3 million already has been directed to the study, including about $4.26 million from the state. If passed, the amendments would save the state as much as $2.4 million more from the study’s next round of financing.
The study — conducted by the Michigan Department of Transportation and other state, federal and provincial agencies in the U.S. and Canada — was formed to come up with the agencies’ anointed plan for a new crossing by next year. The group discarded “twinning” the bridge, owned by Manuel Moroun, and a plan to convert an aging rail tunnel to truck use late last year to focus on a Delray site for a crossing that could cost taxpayers as much as $1.3 billion.
Gilbert and LaJoy say that tossing the privately funded plan to twin the span would waste $184 million the state is already spending on the Gateway project, which connects the Ambassador Bridge to I-75 and I-96, and hundreds of millions more to build a new bridge.
Funding of the project should be held until privately funded options are put back on the table, Gilbert said.
Bill Shrek, MDOT director of communications, said that the study has yet to determine how the new crossing would be funded and that any money spent by public or private interests would be made back in tolls.
But the legislators say they want more oversight of the process and looking at privately funded options will be a top priority.
That could be a good thing, said John Taylor, an associate professor of marketing and logistics at Grand Valley State University.
The time and dollars spent on the study are “troubling,” he said. Legislative oversight might determine whether a new crossing is even needed. But the push towards private dollars “probably benefits the Ambassador Bridge,” he said. “They own the land.”
The Detroit River Tunnel Partnership still would need to acquire permits and land and negotiate a customs agreement to start work on its $600 million tunnel.
That group is owned by the Canadian Pacific Railway and the Borealis Transportation Infrastructure Trust, the investment arm of the Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System.
The two budget amendments passed the state House and Senate in late May. They are now in conference committee.
Detroit International has the land and approvals to break ground on its $400 million twin span next spring, said Dan Stamper, Detroit International president.
But Detroit International’s plan still won’t go unchallenged. The company is fending off a federal Canadian bill aimed at giving the government more oversight over international crossings and strong community opposition in Windsor to its plans.
Canada’s Bill C-3 wasn’t gunning for the Ambassador Bridge, but would give the Canadian government authority to veto construction or alteration of international bridges, and regulate their maintenance, safety, security and operation, said Mark Butler, a communications officer with Transport Canada, the Canadian equivalent of the U.S. Federal Highway Administration.
Stamper said that Detroit International had been “comforted” by Transport Canada testimony that the bill wouldn’t interfere with its plans to twin its span, but was wary about the “micro-managing” of the bridge that it would allow.
The bill is awaiting final approval in Canadian House of Commons before being moved on to the Canadian Senate for passage. It could be enacted by the governor general by this fall, Butler said.
Transport Canada also isn’t ready to give up on the binational study, Butler said. Should Michigan’s funds dry up, Canada still supports the process.
It’s not clear whether the U.S. Federal Highway Administration feels the same. That agency said it was “not appropriate” to speculate on whether it would continue on with the study until the state takes “definitive action.”
Meanwhile, work on the study continues, Shrek said. The group will start drilling core samples Downriver in a matter of weeks.
“We can’t as a state agency react to laws until they’re passed,” he said. “But as some point (passage of the amendments) would stop the process.”
posted by JoeBlog at 6:14 a.m.
<< Home