The Authority As The Authority

It seems that whenever someone wants to talk about a public bridge authority the invited guest is a representative from the Buffalo and Fort Erie Public Bridge Authority (PBA). Ron Rienas from the PBA has been down here so often it seems over the last few years. Hmmm I wonder if he really comes down here to watch how the Ambassador Bridge people run a border crossing so that he can learn from them.

I am sure that you remember that comparison that I have quoted before that demonstrates the differences between the two crossings:

• "A US Federal Highway Administration Report stated:
  
  "the scatter plot of the Ambassador Bridge Crossing comes closest to the "ideal" shape demonstrating a consistently low crossing time for both inbound and outbound traffic. At the other end of the spectrum, (...Blue Water Bridge, and Peace Bridge crossings respectively) have a less desirable distribution of volume/time data points...
  
  Crossing times at the Ambassador Bridge POE are clearly superior and more consistent than any other port of entry in the study... Further, lower crossing times are achieved despite the bridge having a consistently higher volume of traffic...
  
  "For example, at the Ambassador Bridge, the buffer index for inbound truck traffic was just over 65 percent. This indicates that, even with its substantial volume of traffic, operators of the Ambassador Bridge sustained movement across the bridge without imposing lengthy increases in delay times. Contrasting markedly with this was the inbound buffer index at the Peace Bridge of 266 percent."

Now one would think that the PBA was the big enemy of the Ambassador Bridge Company since they want to build a competitive bridge in the PBA's backyard. I would not think that the PBA would want their competition. Therefore one would expect that when Rienas comes down to our region not only does he do so to help us understand the "virtues" of the Public Authority concept like the PBA but also to attack the Bridge Company.

Interestingly, a reader sent me a recording of his testimony before a Michigan House Appropriations Transportation Subcommittee Hearing recently. Actually, when you listen to what he has to say, he could turn out to be the bestest buddy of the Bridge Company. If I did not know who it was, I would have thought that it was Dan Stamper speaking.

How can anyone argue with what the Bridge Company is saying after the representative from the PBA says the same thing. DRIC will have major problems now trying to discredit the position of the Bridge Company!

Let me give you some examples:

1) The total volume of all the Niagara area bridges is 14M vehicles. Volumes have trended down over the last decade, especially after 9/11. Customs causes back-ups primarily into US, not volumes. [Isn't that exactly what the Bridge Company has said. The issue is not capacity therefore as DRIC would like us to believe]

2) Rienas identified that the Whirlpool Rapids Bridge is NEXUS only. Lewiston/Queenston Bridge was expanded to include a FAST lane. [One of the reasons for the Enhancement Project is to add a third lane in each direction on the bridge so that FAST and NEXUS vehicles can have a quick way across the border.]

3) Their capacity project is not a transportation project---rather it is a border improvement project that encompasses transportation but includes other factors ie modernize their plaza to meet Homeland security and CBSA requirements,improve plaza for Border crossing (eg NEXUS lane), redundancy, make maintenance easier, get special loads across much quicker, reduce environmental impacts, economic benefits ie make it easy for industry to know that goods can get across properly, remove border impediments) [Gee that sounds like an Enhancement Project rather than adding new traffic capacity, obviously because traffic is down]

4) They already have 14 lanes of border crossing in their region and still they have back-ups. [The issue is not adding more lanes over a river as DRIC would have us believe. It’s not just a transportation issue but a border issue ie Customs especially into the US]

5) With their project---They looked at a lot of alternatives up and down the river as DRIC did. The crossing location chosen was right beside their existing bridge. Capacity was #4 on the list of reasons for the bridge. Improving border crossing operations and making it safer are the main factors. [Just like in Sarnia, they looked eveywhere but chose to build beside the existing structure since it made sense from a border crossing perspective. Unfortunately for them, PBA has major Community issues where they want to build their expanded plaza unlike the Ambassador Bridge.]

6) While he does not reject the P3 concept saying private entities have their place, Rienas does not seem to care for them for obvious reasons. Instead he suggests that they are acting like a private entity like the Ambassador Bridge Company: Structured as an arm’s length entity, totally self-sustaining, debt not guaranteed by any Government, has to pay off bond-holders first, has to go to Wall St. just like a private entity for its new bridge for money, will have to prepare a prospectus, do an investment grade traffic analysis.

Of course there are some differences. Mr. Rienas likes talking about the low tolls at his Bridge. He claims that they only charge what they need to function and operate the bridges. Their objective is to keep tolls as low as possible since they do not want the tolls to be a disincentive to travel. He tells us that his operations are totally self-sustaining, do not rely on public funds for any of their operations for the bridge and the crossing although they have received infrastructure money for connecting road issues.

Unfortunately, he neglected to mention to the Hearing that they are asking for a $90 million from the US and New York State Governments for their project. That might be one explanation why their tolls are so low because in this case the users do not pay but the Governments would. Another explanation could also be that the Bridge Company builds facilities in advance like the six Customs booth on the Canadian side and has already invested a half billion dollars of its money for its Enhancement Project.

One other difference is that in Niagara the various Authorities work together and manage traffic on a mutual basis. Mr. Rienas obviously never dealt with our Mayor who has lost sight of the fact that he was elected as Mayor of this City and not as a border operator.

If he had more time I'm sure that Mr. Rienas would have said other things such as these that he mentioned in another interview of his that I read:

• Shared border management really died because there was an impasse reached between the government of Canada and the government of the United States. Secretary Chertoff, in April, basically said that there was an impasse between Canada and the US, primarily because the US was unable to perform all of the functions in Canada that they were able to at all other border crossings: search and seizure, arrest, fingerprinting....the loss of shared border management was a huge disappointment to us [Had that been resolved, the issue of Redundancy and Security would have become a nonissue for every border crossing]
  


• Ideally, we would have the European Union model, which is that of perimeter security, where there is a perimeter around us of security between Canada and the US because then you wouldn’t need plazas. You wouldn’t have to do all of the things we’re talking about doing. It would be a free-flowing border with everyone going across and everything going the way it should be going. [In effect, we are getting a virtual border now with many of the new techniques of preclearance. That means again that the need for additional capacity or lanes across the River is reduced]


• As processing has changed, particularly post-9/11, it’s taking longer and there are different criteria and different parameters to get across the border. The only thing to compensate for that is the increased infrastructure that you have. It doesn’t necessarily mean that more people are going to cross; it just means that we hope to eliminate a lot of the congestion that we are experiencing in the bridge right now. [Again, additional capacity is not required and means nothing. What is required is improved Customs facilities to prevent "thickening" of the border and less regulation and impediments to legitimate border crossers.]
  
  
• Since 9/11, there has been a decrease in traffic, but an increase in congestion. [Is that the "dirty little secret" that the Canadian Government is so concerned about and which their recent actions have caused a real chill in Canada/United States relations.]

Here's the clincher that should end DRIC and allow the Enhancement Project to be expedited:

• BJ: ...why do you need three more bridge lanes?
  
  RR: It’s important to understand that the bridge is actually an extension of the plaza.
  
  What I mean by that is that the expedited programs, the low-risk programs like FAST or NEXUS for cars that are operated by both governments, only work in the case that you can get to your booth, your NEXUS booth or FAST booth.
  
  You have to look at it all as one system, because having dedicated NEXUS and FAST lanes really extends the plaza all the way across the river all the way over to the QEW in Canada, and that makes a tremendous difference to the functionality of the bridge. Right now, if you have a NEXUS card and a booth on the other end of the bridge, but there’s traffic on the bridge, it is not doing you any good.
  
  You have to treat the bridge as an extension of the plaza, and that’s the difference with a bridge crossing the Niagara River, an international river, and a bridge crossing the Mississippi River. In our current environment with the traffic volumes right now, in the case of the Mississippi River, we wouldn’t be building a bridge. We’re building a bridge because it has to be part of the border system... we’re building it to make the border work better. That means accommodating all of the NEXUS and FAST needs... If you were a NEXUS cardholder, you would have a dedicated NEXUS lane right on the bridge. That’s the intention."

If Mr. Rienas continues to speak this way, I would expect that the number of invitations that he receives to speak in this region in the future will dry up very quickly.