Real Estate & Property Law

"Lose, Lose"

By Alan Ackerman

freep.com

The state House narrowly approved legislation Wednesday that clears the way for building a span 2 miles south of the privately owned Ambassador Bridge, despite intense lobbying by its owners that delayed a vote for several weeks.

Not a single Republican voted for the bill, which passed by the bare minimum -- 56-51.

The bridge bill now goes to the Republican-controlled Senate, where it faces more opposition.

Backers say the new bridge will create up to 10,000 construction jobs and ultimately lead to a boom in commerce between North America's largest trading partners. Opponents say the benefits are overstated, influenced by flawed studies showing more traffic will use the two bridges.

"I've never seen such a power grab in my life," said Rep. David Agema, R-Grandville.

House Speaker Andy Dillon, D-Redford Township, was upbeat, saying Wednesday's action "creates an opportunity for a bridge to Canada that we don't have to pay for" because the Canadian government would pay Michigan's $550-million, up-front cost. He predicted Senate passage but with changes.

The Detroit International Bridge Crossing (DRIC) is supported by major unions; Ford, General Motors and other manufacturers, and community organizations in southwest Detroit.

One of fiercest critics expected to lead Senate opposition

The second step -- making it through the GOP-controlled Senate -- will only get tougher.

With 56 Democratic-only votes -- the minimum needed for passage -- the legislation withstood a fierce lobbying effort to kill it by owners of the Ambassador Bridge, the Detroit International Bridge Co.

With no Republican House votes, the bill goes to the Republican-controlled Senate, where one of its staunchest critics, veteran Sen. Alan Cropsey, R-DeWitt, is certain to lead opposition.

House Republicans failed in an attempt to remove the proposed bridge project from the legislation on a 54-48 vote.

Dan Stamper, president of the Detroit International Bridge Co., said that despite bravado by the bill's supporters, it passed with the bare minimum of votes needed.

We are missing the true issue at hand.  We have another State as a neighbor.  The State is the Dominion of Canada.  In the dominion is an incorporated city;  Windsor.  Would we allow Windsor to compel the citizens of Detroit and the U.S. government with a decision from Windsor or Quebec? Absolutely not.  Then why are we doing this to them?

Before this is all over, The Michigan State Senate can decide to investigate the realities of living on an international border and come to an accommodation over the bridge or everyone can go to work for the Detroit International Bridge Company.  The existing bridge is now starting to deteriorate, but still spews out enough money every day to employ dozens more as lobbyists or bridge employees.  SHAME ON US for not dealing with the issue earlier.  However, every reason to not build a privately bonded bridge with future income to benefit the local jurisdictions has been proven as false. There is the safety and security reason.  Canadian funding in a disproportionate fashion is now available.  Traffic will return (with business) or none of us will have children living here for forty years and all we will have is a broken State of Michigan with five million as its population.

In the end, should the Michigan State Senate not come to its senses, what we will see is a Federal Court acquisition project initiated by the Federal administration.  The bridge will be nationally owned and controlled crossing, with the citizens of Michigan maintaining the same traffic, but no bridge tolls to maintain the roads.   That would be like what one of my friends calls the stock market for the last two years.  'Lose, Lose'

Full post as published by National Eminent Domain Blog on May 28, 2010 (boomark / email).