Earlier this week, the U.S. Coast Guard sent his firm, the Detroit International Bridge Company, a letter terminating his application to build a second span next to his Ambassador Bridge.
The Coast Guard explained they couldn’t even consider his application for a number of reasons. First of all, it notes that there are issues of property rights that haven’t been resolved.
Actually, they have been resolved. Resolved against the Ambassador Bridge company. Last month a Wayne County judge ordered Moroun to tear down a duty-free store and some gasoline pumps he had constructed in anticipation of building a second bridge. The judge said they were built illegally, on property owned by the city of Detroit, and had to be removed.
Late last year, a different Wayne County judge ruled that Mr. Moroun had illegally occupied and fenced off part of the City of Detroit’s Riverside Park, and ordered him to vacate that too.
The Ambassador Bridge Company is appealing both decisions, but wouldn’t seem to have much chance. Additionally, it’s clear that the Canadian government doesn’t want him to build a second bridge next to his old one. There is considerable evidence that it would cause terrible traffic congestion and be an environmental hazard.
But it is equally clear that a new bridge is needed, The Ambassador has narrow lanes, no shoulders and is wearing out.
Traffic flow, which has been down because of the recession, is beginning to pick up. Bill Shreck, communications director for the Michigan Department of Transportation, noted that this is the “busiest and most important border crossing in America.”
There are four bridges between Niagara Falls and Buffalo. New York. If anything were to happen to the Ambassador Bridge, the economies of both Michigan and Ontario would be swiftly devastated.
Fortunately, there is a backup plan: For years, a group called the Detroit International River Crossing, or DRIC, has worked on a plan to build a second bridge across the rover, about two miles south of the Ambassador. This would be a publicly owned bridge, jointly supervised and inspected by the governments of both nations.
But, as I understand it, private investors would be welcome to invest in the new DRIC bridge as well, probably by buying bonds. Remarkably, this plan has the backing of just about everybody across the spectrum. Former Governors John Engler and James Blanchard favor the DRIC bridge. So does liberal Jennifer Granholm and the staunchly conservative Oakland County executive, L. Brooks Patterson. The Michigan Department of Transportation supports it, as do the governments of the United States and Canada.
Additionally, this proposed bridge has received environmental approvals from several agencies, including the Coast Guard.
But preliminary funding and approval has been held up by Mr. Moroun’s supporters in the Michigan Legislature, most notably Senator Alan Cropsey.
The last thing our state needs is someone risking our economic future for political games. The Coast Guard’s decision to cancel the Ambassador Bridge application ought to be seen as definitive.
We need a new bridge for international trade. It’s now clear that Mr. Moroun isn’t going to be allowed to construct one. Which means that it we don’t build it, prosperity isn’t going to come.
Jack Lessenberry has chronicled the sleazy history of Matty Moroun for years. I can't argue with the Lessenberry considered wisdom on the subject of Moroun and his bridge company.
Another bridge, with competing ownership, aprat from Moroun, at another non-Moroun location, would seem to make all kinds of sense to me. As it does to Jack Lessenberry.
But as we say goodbye to a Second Matty Moroun Bridge to Canada, it strikes me as significant that this was a guy who was willing to invest his own money, with a considerable additional payment to the State of Michigan to boot, to build his own bridge. It just seems to me that there's nothing wrong with private bridges and tunnels, especially if there are several of them. If there were five bridge-builders who all wanted to build international bridges between Detroit and Windsor, I'd be happy to let them all have a go at construction. And if one of those builders were Matty Moroun, I'd say fine to him too. Have at it, Matty.
It is the competitive market that produces better goods and services, and a public-sector monopoly is not much more attractive to me than a Matty Moroun monopoly. Worse, even; Matty Moroun says he doesn't need my tax dollars to build his (second) bridge. If so, that's got him one-up (perhaps) on the State of Michigan.
Anyway, here's to private funding for a new, second bridge...
Posted by: Anonymous | March 03, 2010 at 06:16 PM
If only life was as simple as Jack thinks.
Let's assume Matty has been stopped, an assumption one ought not to make so quickly. Does that mean a DRIC bridge will be built?
Nope, remember there are all kinds of lawsuits out there already that will have to be litigated including one that could stop MDOT cold.
Canada tried once before to beat Moroun over Bridge ownership and was forced to settle. What has changed since then to improve Canada's position?
A new bridge may NOT be needed until as late as 2035-40 according to MDOT's Algurabi at the hearings of Senator Cropsey. So why would money be spent at a time when the US and Michigan are in deep debt? Michigan already cannot pay for hundreds of road and bridge projects'
Moreover, traffic is now below 1999 levels.
The Ambassador Bridge would still be competing for traffic so who would invest in bonds that might never be repaid since tolls at the new bridge would have to be several times higher than Moroun's to pay back the billions involved. The traffic would stay at the old bridge and the new one would go broke. Or would Michigan taxpayers have to subsidize the DRIC bridge operations?
Of course there is no P3 legislation in Michigan and the MDOT traffic report has problems since it does not meet the statutory requirement.
Canada's secret mandate letter issued last X-mas to buy the Ambassador Bridge proves that Canada has NO intention and never did to build a DRIC Bridge but wants Matty's bridge and to build a second bridge there. DRIC was just a smokescreen to get Moroun to sell cheaply.
What we have Jack is a stalemate right now. It can only be resolved by the Governments and Moroun sitting down and honestly trying to negotiate a resolution of the border war or we will be in this mess for decades.
We have lost already the period from late 2002 until today because of this silly bickering.
Posted by: JoeBlog | March 03, 2010 at 08:34 PM