Tag: MDOT

First Tour stop:

Don't Raise MI Taxes Tour Stop (St. Clair Shores)
Americans for Prosperity - Michigan
Tuesday, April 23, 2013 from 7:00 PM to 9:00 PM
Saint Clair Shores, MI

Thank you for your ongoing efforts, Mr. Hagerstrom!  As noted from an mLive screed, it should be highlighted who the Legislator held responsible for the latest MIaGOP Tax Hike scheme on Michigan residents.

A new plan taking shape in the state House, spearheaded by Republican [questionable] Rep. Wayne Schmidt of Traverse City, is expected to include increased gasoline taxes and registration fees. The proposal also would exempt fuel purchases from the state's six percent sales tax, which is collected at the pump but is not used to fix roads.

Congratulations, District 104 voters.  Feeling dumb about sending Wayne "Show Pony" back for another term in Lansing, yet?  I doubt it.  But wait, there's more!

House Speaker Jase Bolger, R-Marshall, signaled support for the plan on Thursday, telling reporters that the legislature must "be committed to solving the full problem," including making sure that all taxes paid at the pump go toward roads.

What were your words about raising taxes, Speaker Bolger?

Once upon a time.

Mayor Janice Daniels in December of 2011 led the opposition in the Troy City Council for an $8.5 million train depot for good reason.  Her opposition to a project that would be built with free money was framed with an understanding that nothing is truly free.  Even after the project was stripped down a month later, and re-presented for a couple million less, she held her ground, and looked at the bigger picture.  Ongoing expenses make the continuing use of the pusher-man's product not nearly as euphoric as when it was offered for free.

The Troy City Council didn't get it, and the vote for the effort was shifted. Even in the face of the citizen commentary that was recorded as 11-7 in opposition to the transit center.  As RightMichigan.com poster Rougman pointed out at the time, its $5,500/sq ft cost was stripped down to $3,100/sq ft (a travesty for its cheapness) and the gold plated accoutrements would have to be withheld.

"By shaving off 400 square feet the project's cost has been lowered significantly. That was some expensive square footage there--roughly coming in at $5,500 per square foot. The smaller and redrawn project will cost a mere $3,100 per square foot which I find absolutely alarming...what kind of slum are these bureaucrats trying to push over on us? No gold toilet seats? No granite counter tops?"

Electric car owners now get to be free loaders as an additional benefit of purchasing the Leaf, Volt or other eco-recommended units of transportation.  As Part of the problem with EV solutions has been the short distances they can travel, the feds have made sure seed money is there for charging stations. 8-10 hours of charging can now happen at the I-75/Dixie Highway carpool lot.

And by golly it appears as though there will be no charge for the juice.

"Grand Blanc Township, which already pays for the electricity lighting the carpool lot, will cover the electric cost for the charging station as well. Coulomb Technologies, Inc. provided the electric charger station and the Grand Blanc Community Fund paid for its installation. The project was started with money provided through a federal grant. "

Delicious.

The image below the line is just the first salvo from both sides of the bridge issue.

Its good to see the arguments made from the different perspectives. Plenty to be said about whether or not we actually pay for it in one way or another, but surprisingly no one yet doing what will ultimately provide the most accurate answer.

The math equation.

20,000 Crossings a day now.  Unless the Ambassador bridge is FORCED to close, then the traffic would split.

Average ticket of $6 Gross $120,000/day (if the ambassador is FORCED to close) $44 Million a year

Debt service (interest only) of $30 Million a year. Then add to this the cost of operations, ongoing liabilities (you know those pesky benefits) and maintenance.   An additional $30? $50 million? A year?  

My goodness So who DOES pay for it when it doesnt even pay its bond?  mmmm?

Dick Morris says Rick Snyder should act like a Republican, and in the process draws out the hard core "re-distributionists."  Darrell Dawsey writes at MLive:

Matty Moroun is rich enough. He doesn't need or deserve a second bridge. (Personally, I wish someone could take the first one from him, too.) Free enterprise is fine, but private citizens shouldn't be in the business of owning international border crossings. Our borders, and the economic and national security issues they generate, are a matter of public interest.

Snyder's wishes of another bridge makes perfect sense in some ways, and little in others.

He is a "Milliken Republican" which brings a brand of centrism that has too much in common with the Dawsey think, that government ought to have control of all things no matter how miserably they fail under government control. Detroit Schools? Detroit itself?  Perfect examples of Centrism allowing a minor scratch to develop into full blown gangrene.  Why not invite such catastrophe when given the opportunity?  Perhaps a little brick and mortar money poured into the patient's [amputation inviting] open sore infested hole will fix it?

Maybe such things need to be questioned a little more thoroughly.

To hear MDOT talk, the proposed Detroit River International Crossing (DRIC) is not so much a bridge as a yellow brick road to eternal prosperity.  This image appeals to your Wizard, of course, but I am more concerned about whether the image is based in reality or merely the result of a bump on the head.  Why the DRIC instead of a private second span put up by the Ambassador Bridge (AB) people?

The case for DRIC goes something like this:  (1) we need a second bridge to accommodate the tremendous growth in traffic we will see in the future, (2) the good witch of the north (Canada, for those of you not following my Oz analogy) has offered us a $550 million loan to get started, and (3) we can turn that $550 million into another $2 billion from the federal government to put toward our roads.  Ultimately, the DRIC is supposed to generate thousands and thousands of jobs and enable our manufacturing and agriculture industries to thrive.  The Canadian loan, the cost of the project, and all future costs would be paid or repaid out of bridge tolls.

Let's set aside the "jobs" and "thriving industries" justifications for now.  Whether the bridge is built through a public-private partnership or by the AB folks, those benefits should still accrue, so those justifications favor neither approach.  And, if we need a second bridge, we need a second bridge, regardless of who builds it.

So, based solely on media coverage (a dicey proposition, I know), the case for DRIC appears to boil down to the fact that Canada has offered its loan for a public bridge, and we can use that loan to leverage federal highway funds.  Let's look at these issues in some more detail: