Thoughts and Opinions On Today's Important Issues

Friday, October 09, 2009

Presidential Permits For DRIC, Again

What a perfect opportunity I was given to remind people about Presidential Permits for our border crossing and DRIC. I had absolutely nothing to do with it, honest, and was shocked to see it in print.

BLOG readers already know that the Ambassador Bridge Enhancement Project does NOT need one but the DRIC Bridge does require a Permit.

My BLOG is getting famous. It was mentioned in the Minutes of a US DRIC meeting recently:

It's pretty clear that DRIC has done little about getting a Permit so far. It's "under development." Now that sounds underwhelming.

I decided to clarify matters and sent off this note to some of the Minutes recipients and to Michigan Legislators. It's too bad that Michigan gave money to MDOT for DRIC in their Budget. After reading this, you may wonder why as I did:

  • "I note the reference to my BLOG, Windsorcityblog in your Minutes and a supposed error that I made.

    So that the recipients of your Minutes understand exactly what I have said about DRIC and the Presidential Permit, I would direct them to my BLOG May 12, 2006 "President Bush's Choice: The Twinned Ambassador Bridge"

    As I stated:

    "It was revealed in a letter sent November 4, 2005 that the President is not prepared to give his concurrence for DRIC’s “central” location for a new bridge.

    The only crossing that makes sense, therefore, is the twinning of the Ambassador Bridge and no Presidential permit is required to do so!...

    [In a closed door session] What did FHWA request: “State Department concurrence in the conclusion that the centrally-located alternatives are the only practical alternatives for a new Detroit River International crossing.” In other words, the President’s designate was being asked to concur in what DRIC was proposing as to the location for the new bridge! Please note the use of the word ONLY!

    Do you see anywhere in that document where such concurrence was given? In bureaucrat-eze, State did not tell FHWA to get lost directly. They did it indirectly. State told FHWA that they would do their job if an application were brought forward but they pointed out a major problem which would NOT allow them to grant the concurrence requested..."

    Nevertheless, what did the four Governments determine on November 14, 2005 as if the meeting was never held and the November 4 letter was never received: “A new crossing in the Central Area accessed via HCR/Talbot Road and the West Windsor Industrial Area will be carried forward for continued analysis.”

    I trust that this clarifies matters."

Almost 4 years ago that State Dept. letter was written. Nothing has changed except a ton of taxpayer money has been spent by the bureaucrats. What a waste of time and money. For what?