Michigan Votes Forum

Discuss issues, ideas and legislation related to the Great Lake State.
Welcome to Michigan Votes Forum Sign in | Join | Help
in Search
Latest post 09-30-2010 12:02 PM by MichiganVotes.org Editor. 3 replies.
Page 1 of 1 (4 items)
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  • 01-01-2001 12:00 AM

    2010 House Bill 5889 (Appropriations: 2010-2011 Transportation budget )

    Introduced in the House on February 24, 2010, the House version of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2009-2010 Department of Transportation budget. This would appropriate $3.318 billion in gross spending, compared to $3.257 billion, which was the FY 2008-2009 amount enrolled in 2008. Of this, $1.227 billion is federal money, compared to $1.227 billion the previous year (plus additional “stimulus” money appropriated in other budgets). Most of the rest is money from state gas tax and vehicle registration fees. Unusually, the House uses $84 million of state "general fund" money in this budget to meet federal road money "matching funds" requirements

    The vote was 59 in favor, 47 opposed and 2 not voting

    (House Roll Call 249 at House Journal 0)

    Click here to view bill details.
  • 09-30-2010 12:01 PM In reply to

    Re: 2010 House Bill 5889 (Appropriations: 2010-2011 Transportation budget )

    Senator Kahn, under his constitutional right of protest (Art. 4, Sec. 18), protested against the adoption of the first conference report on House Bill No. 5889.

    Senator Kahn’s statement is as follows:

    The Department of Transportation, as I see it, has been a profoundly bad actor. The DRIC project, when you cut to the chase, is about a taking. It’s about a government bankrupting or attempting to bankrupt or intimidate or all of the above; a private business which they have no intention of reimbursing.

    In support of that behavior, as Senator Cropsey has pointed out, they’ve blocked the ramps to the Ambassador Bridge. Heck, they had them full of dirt until a newspaper article pointed out how dopey that was. Now they have black bags over the traffic lights there. We’ve spent $240 million on the Gateway project—money not very well spent.

    This is the last vote I think we are going to be taking before we go off to campaign here in Michigan, here in the United States, here in our country. In my experience with the DRIC project, there are folks who are supposed to be working for us in the Transportation Department ferrying around officials and hawking for them, officials from a foreign country.

    This private company that they are, in fact, attacking is the same company that we offered the state tax credits which we dearly need in order to fund the Transportation budget in the first place.

    So I vote “no,” as there remains dollars which will go toward funding any part of the DRIC project.

     

  • 09-30-2010 12:02 PM In reply to

    Re: 2010 House Bill 5889 (Appropriations: 2010-2011 Transportation budget )

    Senator Cropsey’s statement is as follows:

    I will reluctantly support this budget. Once again, the MDOT budget is the caboose on the budget train, all because the department waited until the last minute to claim the sky is falling on the DRIC issue. MDOT ignored the Legislature in 2006 and started a $40 million study on a bridge that we said we did not want; $40 million has been spent on a mega-project study which has failed to justify spending billions of tax dollars on a bridge that would take resources from road projects all over Michigan.

    This budget curbs MDOT’s excesses. We stop the department from entering into any new contracts on DRIC. Only contracts in place before September, can be paid. MDOT must fulfill its contractual obligations and avoid liability and ill-will with vendors, but no new aspects of DRIC can be initiated. In other words, MDOT cannot spend any more than $250,000 through the end of this year, at which time, a new administration will thankfully take over. The conference report is crystal clear; wrap it up, MDOT. Since the department is required to report all spending on DRIC by March 31, we’ll see just how much taxpayer money this administration has wasted on this boondoggle.

    Unfortunately, in last year’s budget, MDOT misinterpreted the budget language, and that is being charitable. Before the ink was dry on the budget, an MDOT spokesman was quoted in the Windsor Star as saying that the limited funds for an investment grade traffic study would allow MDOT to match federal funds and spend a whole lot more. I want to be clear. That is not what the conference committee is adopting in this report. MDOT is limited to spending no more that $250,000 each quarter through May 2011 and only from transportation resources available to the state in this budget.

    In the last budget, MDOT agreed to do an investment grade traffic study. We gave them millions in tax dollars to do it. When we finally received the report—late, by the way—the authors of the report acknowledged that it was not an investment grade study. Instead, it was an overly-optimistic traffic projection by the same consultants who predicted traffic that never materialized on the bankrupt South Bay Expressway and the bankrupt North Carolina Connector.

    MDOT failed to give us the report in May, just as they failed to provide a bill that would have allowed an up-or-down vote on DRIC. Instead, MDOT tried to shove through legislation that was a bold power grab. It was legislation that would give up our Michigan sovereignty to a foreign government and leave Michigan taxpayers on the hook.

    Under this conference report, MDOT’s credit card has been revoked. They can only spend for pre-existing contracts. MDOT cannot approve multi million-dollar DRIC contracts late in this budget year as they did in 2006. They cannot sneak through contract extensions before the State Administrative Board like they did last year. This budget only provides funds to complete current contracts—no new spending, no new project components, no new permits, and no new shenanigans. So unless the Legislature specifically votes on enabling legislation, MDOT cannot drag taxpayers further into the DRIC quagmire.

    MDOT must follow through on existing contract commitments only, which is consistent with our philosophy of making our state one in which businesses can rely on for its agreements. MDOT should be consistent with such agreements, and MDOT should not delay the completion of existing projects like the Gateway project in Detroit. Last Friday, I was embarrassed by the department when members of the Council of State Governments saw the Gateway project. What they saw was highway ramps that have been completed for more than a year, for which taxpayers have paid dearly, but blocked by MDOT concrete barricades. That is shameful. MDOT needs to fulfill its commitments on this project and finish what it started, and stop delaying international and interstate commerce. MDOT, take down those barricades.

    On a positive note, MDOT is to use toll credits generated by private transportation facilities so Michigan can obtain its federal transportation funds. After years of ignoring and minimizing these toll credits, the conference report is telling MDOT to use those toll credits instead of bonding or raiding other budgets. The department should make the most of this opportunity, and work with those private transportation facilities for the benefit of Michigan taxpayers, so we can fully utilize federal road funds all over this state, and put our construction companies to work.

     

  • 09-30-2010 12:02 PM In reply to

    Re: 2010 House Bill 5889 (Appropriations: 2010-2011 Transportation budget )

    Senator Basham’s statement is as follows:

    There is a lot I could say about this issue, but I won’t. I would just encourage members to support House Bill No. 5889, the conference report. I would hope that we would do the right thing, and support this piece of legislation.

     

Page 1 of 1 (4 items)
Powered by Community Server (Commercial Edition), by Telligent Systems