For Immediate Release Contact: Tom Shields October 22, 2012 517-372-4400 [email protected]

Passage of Proposal 6 Could Jeopardize Bridge Projects Throughout the State of

Bridge Projects in Allegan, Barry, Ionia, Kent, Montcalm, Muskegon and Ottawa Counties Possibly Affected

West Mich. – As if Proposal 6 doesn’t have enough reasons why it would be bad for Michigan with the monopoly protection for billionaire Matty Moroun, there is another possible consequence to statewide bridge projects if passed.

Proposal 6 contains flawed language that could require voters to approve any new bridge or tunnel built in the state after January 1, 2012 if the Constitutional amendment passes.

Legal experts have analyzed the language in Proposal 6 determining that it is worded in such a way that includes any bridge, tunnel or overpass built in Michigan beginning in January 2012, not just international bridges or tunnels.

According to the proposal, all international bridges must be approved by a statewide vote and a vote of the local community where the bridge would be built. The language also defines an international bridge as, “any bridge or tunnel that is not open to the public or serving traffic as of January 1, 2012.”

According to the non-partisan Senate Fiscal Agency’s analysis of Proposal 6 “...the constitutional amendment could apply to all bridge and tunnel projects involving State resources, regardless of whether they were international, including bridges that are currently planned but not yet built.

Additionally, the Senate Fiscal Agency also determined that any vote on a new bridge would add $2,000 per voting precinct, or an estimated $10.4 million statewide.

-MORE-

“This proposal would be bad public policy without the flawed language,” said Lt. Governor Brain Calley. “But this language could stop the 55 bridges the state is building this year and any bridge in the future. Proposal 6 would be an economic disaster for our state.”

“No matter what your opinion is of the State of Michigan building a new international bridge from to Windsor, the language in Proposal 6 defining an “International Bridge” refers to any bridge and could require a statewide and local vote on all bridge projects, thereby jeopardizing bridge projects across Michigan,” said Larry Merrill, Michigan Townships Association executive director. “The impractical and cumbersome process of necessitating that signatures be collected to put a bridge project on local and state ballots should definitely cause local governments to be concerned about Proposal 6 and its far-reaching impact.”

“We don’t need sloppy constitutional amendments in our State’s Constitution,” said Andy Johnston, Vice President of Governmental Affairs for the Grand Rapids Area Chamber of Commerce. “And we certainly cannot afford to jeopardize rebuilding Michigan’s infrastructure because one company wants to protect their monopoly.”

“Michigan needs to focus on job creation. The NITC would support nearly 12,000 construction-related jobs and more than 25,000 new jobs once the bridge is open. There are an additional 5,000 construction jobs at stake with other bridge projects planned for the next three years,” said Douglas W. Stockwell, Business Manager, International Union of Operating Engineers Local 324. “This ballot proposal could put all of those jobs in jeopardy, and with the state of the economy, we should not be turning down new jobs.”

In Allegan, Barry, Ionia, Kent, Montcalm, Muskegon and Ottawa counties, there are a total of nine bridges that were either built or repaired in 2012, totaling at $22,903,914. For 2013- 2014, these seven counties are set to either build or repair 15 bridges and overpasses, totaling $110,845,489. They are all in jeopardy if Proposal 6 passes.

County # Of Bridges (all 3 years) Total Cost Allegan 4 $6,043,814 Barry 1 $2,655,000 Ionia 4 $11,332,850 Kent 1 $4,242,402 Montcalm 4 $4,399,837 Muskegon 1 $810,000 Ottawa 9 $104,265,500 TOTAL 24 $133,749,403

These seven counties are not the only areas in Michigan heavily affected by Proposal 6. In 2012, the number of bridge projects completed or scheduled for repairs by the end of the year statewide is 55. These 55 bridge repairs will cost a total of $116,522,277.

-MORE- For 2013-2014, the number of bridges across the state set to be repaired or rebuilt is 113, at a total cost of $413,888,606.

Year # Of Bridges Total Cost 2012 55 $116,522,277 2013-2014 113 $413,888,606 TOTALS 168 $530,410,883

Taxpayers Against Monopolies is a ballot question committee formed to oppose the People Should Decide ballot proposal. Opponents of the proposal include the business, labor, and community groups throughout Michigan.

For more information, go to www.facebook.com/TaxpayersAgainstMonopolies

###

Paid for by Taxpayers Against Monopolies, 225 S. Washington Sq., Lansing, MI 48933

Legal Opinion: Proposal 6 Jeopardizes All Future State and Local Bridge and Tunnel Projects

The following are excerpts from legal briefs filed by attorneys from the law firms Honigman Miller and Miller Canfield regarding the ballot language in Proposal 6 that would require a statewide and local vote on “any” new bridge or tunnel built in Michigan.

The ballot petition at issue filed by “The People Should Decide” (the “Petition”) proposes to amend the Constitution to subject the State’s authority to build any bridge or tunnel (not just “international” bridges and tunnels) to a statewide and local veto vote. And it so limits the State’s authority without any exception for such things as homeland security, national disaster, economic or transportation need.

Most troubling, however, is the remarkably expansive and retroactive reach of the Petition’s limitations on the State’s constitutional authority to construct and finance bridges and tunnels of any kind—whether international or otherwise. Although the proposed amendment appears on it’s surface to apply to “international” bridges and tunnels, the proposed amendment would actually apply to all bridges or tunnels within the State of Michigan dating back to January 1, 2012. Indeed, the proposed definition of “new international bridges or tunnels for motor vehicles” is much broader than “new international” infrastructure and includes in no uncertain terms: “any bridge or tunnel which is not open to the public and serving traffic as of January 1, 2012.” (emphasis added).

If adopted, the proposed amendment, backed by a private interest, international bridge owner in Detroit, would prohibit, by definition, the State of Michigan (including its subdivisions or instrumentalities) from constructing or financing any bridge or tunnel for motor vehicle traffic—whether international or otherwise—unless it receives prior approval from both the statewide electorate and the local, municipal electorate where the new bridge or tunnel would be located. As a consequence of this dual requirement, even if a proposed bridge were approved by the voters of the entire State, a single municipality such as Detroit could block development of the bridge from ever occurring. Conversely, even if a particular municipality was in desperate need of a new bridge or tunnel, one could not be built absent approval from the entire State.

-MORE-

Proposal 6 Ballot Language

6

Paid for by Taxpayers Against Monopolies, 225 S. Washington Sq., Lansing, MI 48933

2012 Local Bridge Projects That Will Be Affected By The People Should Decide Ballot Proposal

Route Location County Costs East Washington Road Over Bad River, Gratiot County Gratiot $1,583,400 W Taft Road Over Otter Creek, Gratiot County Gratiot $1,122,030 West River Road Over N. B. of Chippewa River, Isabella Co Isabella $1,123,584 Beal City Road Over S. B. Salt River, Isabella County Isabella $989,789 Bishop Road At Miller Drain, Saginaw County Saginaw $1,552,500 South Merrill Road Over South Branch Bad River, Saginaw Co Saginaw $995,400 County Road 544 Over Flat River, Montcalm County Montcalm $1,262,100 Pontaluna Road Over Norris Creek, Muskegon County Muskegon $810,000 23 Mile Road At North Branch Clinton River, Macomb County Macomb $4,800,000 26 Mile Road At Deer Creek, Macomb County Macomb $985,500 Beech Road Over Rouge River, City of Southfield Oakland $1,807,200 Avon Road Over Clinton River, Oakland County Oakland $3,645,000 Livernois Road Over Clinton River Oakland $4,030,500 S. Main Street At Mill Creek, City of Yale St. Clair $1,437,000 Lakeshore Road Over Carrigan Drain, St Clair County St. Clair $930,000 Aarwood Road NW At Rapid River, Kalkaska County Kalkaska $1,200,000 Low Bridge Road Over Pine River, Manistee County Manistee $1,200,000 220th Avenue At Big Beaver Creek, Osceola County Osceola $690,000 190th Avenue Over Hersey River, Osceola County Osceola $750,000 200th Avenue Over Rose Lake Outlet, Osceola County Osceola $690,000 638 Highway Over Black River, Presque Isle County Presque Isle $960,000 2nd Street At Gun River, Allegan County B01 Allegan $1,599,753 2nd Street At Gun River, Allegan County B03 Allegan $1,403,061 113th Avenue Over N. Br. Black River Allegan $1,447,000 N Michigan Avenue Over Thornapple River, City of Hastings Barry $2,655,000 Jonesville Road Over County Drain 33, Branch County Branch $515,000 Redfield Road Over Christiana Creek, Cass County Cass $1,156,000 River Street Over Kalamazoo River, Kalamazoo Co Kalamazoo $3,333,300 Kime Road Over Fawn River, St. Joseph County St. Joseph $1,002,000 Golf Course Road over Falls River Baraga $900,000 County Road Ch Over Middle Branch Escanaba River, Marquette Co Marquette $660,000 County Road 550 Over Adler Creek, Marquette County Marquette $1,050,000 E Colony Road Over Maple River, Clinton County Clinton $1,245,000 E Kalamo Highway Over Battle Creek River, Eaton County Eaton $814,800 Tripp Road At E B St. Joseph of Maumee River, Hillsdale Co Hillsdale $450,000 Benner Highway Over South Branch of River Raisin, Lenawee County Lenawee $1,546,800 Lennon Road Over Rush Bed Creek, Shiawassee County Shiawassee $576,000 Willis Road Over W Branch Paint Creek, Washtenaw County Washtenaw $768,000 TOTAL $53,685,717

Paid for by Taxpayers Against Monopolies, 225 S. Washington Sq., Lansing, MI 48933

2012 State Trunkline Bridge Projects That Will Be Affected By The People Should Decide Ballot Proposal

Route Location County Cost M-89 Over Kalamazoo River Mill Race, Plainwell ALLEGAN $1,594,000 M-65 Over North Branch of Thunder Bay River ALPENA $3,003,930 M-139 Over Dowagiac River BERRIEN $2,687,000 M-66 Over Wanondaga Creek CALHOUN $1,573,200 M-50 5 Structures on M-50 in Eaton County EATON $5,781,560 M-43 M-43 Eastbound (Saginaw Street) Over the Grand River INGHAM $7,408,811 I-96 Eastbound and Westbound Over Abandoned CSX Railroad IONIA $3,353,000 M-50/US-127 M-50/US-127 Business Route Over Norfolk Southern JACKSON $5,124,461 M-331 M-331 (Park Street) Over Axtell Creek KALAMAZOO $1,415,702 M-24 Over Plum Creek LAPEER $837,200 US-223 Over River Raisin LENAWEE $2,778,910 US-24 Over Clinton River OAKLAND $1,287,000 I-96 Under 112th Avenue OTTAWA $8,780,000 I-75 Under James Road SAGINAW $2,825,087 M-46 M-46 Over Sucker Creek and M-25 Over Harbor Beach TUSCOLA $3,820,000 Creek M-25 Over Quanicassee River TUSCOLA $5,551,887 I-75 I-75 Under I-75 Northbound WAYNE $5,014,812 TOTAL $62,836,560

Paid for by Taxpayers Against Monopolies, 225 S. Washington Sq., Lansing, MI 48933

2013-2014 Local Bridge Projects That Will Be Affected By The People Should Decide Ballot Proposal

Route Location County Cost Gary Road Over Shiawassee River SAGINAW $2,620,500 Elmwood Road Over Wiscoggin Drain TUSCOLA $991,500 Prairie Street Over Maple River IONIA $4,500,000 Carlson Road Over Dickerson Creek MONTCALM $964,400 Luce Street Over Sand Creek OTTAWA $2,485,500 Archer Drive Over Channel to Lake St. Clair MACOMB $795,000 Chapman Road Over Deer Creek MACOMB $1,012,500 Boardman Road Over E. Br. Coon Creek MACOMB $840,000 Vernier Street Over Swan Creek ST. CLAIR $669,000 Gratiot Road Over Pine River ST. CLAIR $3,391,500 Wilkins Street Over Grand Trunk Railroad WAYNE $3,733,500 GRAND Cass Road Over Boardman River TRAVERSE $3,088,580 Saddler Road Over Pere Marquette River LAKE $900,000 Old M-63 Over Little Manistee River LAKE $1,200,000 Thirteen Mile Road Over Big Bear Creek MANISTEE $1,020,000 3 Mile Road Over N. Br. Chippewa River OSCEOLA $721,500 Date Road Over Keelo Creek BERRIEN $900,000 Michigan Avenue Over Rice Creek CALHOUN $1,747,500 Pulver Road Over Rocky River ST. JOSEPH $1,073,700 Floating Bridge Road Over Rocky River ST. JOSEPH $1,045,650 Worth Road Over Little Brevort River MACKINAC $1,012,500 EM Road Over Mehl and Little Lake Overflow MARQUETTE $825,000 Shaffer Road At Little Cedar River, Gladwin County GLADWIN $690,000 Townhall Road Over SB Tobacco River, Gladwin Co GLADWIN $1,815,000 Anton Street Over Sebewaing River, Village of Sebewaing HURON $1,791,000 W Beal City Road Over NB Chippewa River, Isabella County ISABELLA $1,095,864 W Jordan Road Over Coldwater River, Isabella Co ISABELLA $1,116,192 Frost Road Over Swan Creek, Saginaw Co SAGINAW $1,767,600 Fergus Road Over Shiawassee River, Saginaw Co SAGINAW $3,865,500 Pruess Road Over NcClellan Run Drain, Saginaw Co SAGINAW $667,500 190th Avenue Over Little Muskegon River, Mecosta Co MECOSTA $1,222,500 County Road 510 Over W.B.Fish Creek, Montcalm Co MONTCALM $1,208,337 Carlsen Road Over Dickerson Creek MONTCALM $965,000 New Haven Road Over Deer Creek, Macomb County MACOMB $1,507,500 Wolcott Road Over NB Clinton River, Macomb County MACOMB $1,618,500 33 Mile Road Over Cemetery Creek, Macomb County MACOMB $796,500 Hagen Road Over Deer Creek, Macomb County MACOMB $855,000 33 Mile Road Over Highbank Creek, Macomb County MACOMB $607,500 W 13 Mile Road Over Rouge River, Oakland County OAKLAND $3,144,000

Ball Street Over Kearsley Creek, Village of Ortonville OAKLAND $1,018,500 Bridge Street Over Belle River, City of Marine City ST. CLAIR $3,858,000 Riley Center Road Over Belle River, St Clair Co ST. CLAIR $2,392,500 Short Cut Road Over Unnamed Creek, St. Clair County ST. CLAIR $910,500 Pointe Drive Over Unnamed Canal, St. Clair County ST. CLAIR $1,321,500 GRAND W Front Street Over Boardman River, Traverse City TRAVERSE $1,650,000 S Washington Avenue Over Pere Marquette Lake Bayou, Ludington MASON $3,340,047 Over North Branch Clam River, Missaukee W Brinks Road County MISSAUKEE $1,087,500 23 Mile Road Over Kalamazoo River, Calhoun County CALHOUN $1,192,500 E Kilgore Road Over Portage Creek, City of Portage KALAMAZOO $1,179,000 Menge Creek Road Over Menge Creek North, Baraga County BARAGA $810,000 Menge Creek Road Over Menge Creek South, Baraga County BARAGA $810,000 Riverside Drive Over Mission Creek, Sault Ste Marie CHIPPEWA $870,000 29th Lane Over Tacoosh River, Delta County DELTA $990,000 Ten Curves Road Over Manistique River, Schoolcraft County SCHOOLCRAFT $1,425,000 Van Atta Road Over Red Cedar River, Ingham County INGHAM $1,477,500 Noble Road Over Doan Creek, Ingham County INGHAM $750,000 Gale Road Over Willow Creek INGHAM $465,000 O Brien Road Over Sandstone Creek, Jackson County JACKSON $1,012,500 Rodesiler Highway Over Draper Drain, Lenawee County LENAWEE $1,087,500 Center Road Over Cranberry Creek, Livingston County LIVINGSTON $855,000 W Layton Road Over EB Red Cedar River, Livingston County LIVINGSTON $823,500 Secor Road Over Lockwood Drain, Monroe County MONROE $580,500 Over Norfolk Southern RR, Washtenaw S Ford Boulevard County WASHTENAW $4,230,000 Peterson Road Over Bear River GLADWIN $742,500 Crapo Road Over Bad River GRATIOT $994,560 State Road Over Drain #473 GRATIOT $889,560 Schock Road Over Elm Creek HURON $978,000 Leaton Road Over Lewis Drain ISABELLA $960,960 Leaton Road Over Spring Creek ISABELLA $960,960 Coleman Road Over Big Salt River MIDLAND $2,220,560 Stark Road Over Sturgeon Creek MIDLAND $1,055,150 Thomas Road Over Allen Ext. Drain TUSCOLA $975,000 Riverside Drive Over Libhart Creek IONIA $1,420,500 Long Lake Road Over Flat River IONIA $2,059,350 AAT Road Over Mulligan Creek MARQUETTE $1,050,000 County Road 550 Over Little Garlic River MARQUETTE $1,050,000 St. Clair Road Over Maple River CLINTON $1,050,000 Zimmer Road Over Red Cedar River INGHAM $1,950,000 Warner Road Over N. Br. Kalamazoo River JACKSON $975,000 Cross Road Over Kalamazoo River JACKSON $975,000 Folks Road Over S. Br. Kalamazoo River JACKSON $1,050,000 Packard Road Over Baker and May Drain LENAWEE $1,057,500 Dean Road Over Yellow River Drain LIVINGSTON $882,000 Jewell Road Over Marion Drain #2 LIVINGSTON $790,500 Feldkamp Road Over Saline River WASHTENAW $1,185,000 Austin Road Over Saline River WASHTENAW $1,485,000 TOTAL $121,164,970

Paid for by Taxpayers Against Monopolies, 225 S. Washington Sq., Lansing, MI 48933

2013-2014 State Trunkline Bridge Projects That Will Be Affected By The People Should Decide Ballot Proposal

2013 Route Location County Costs I-94 3 Bridges on I-94, Detroit Wayne $12,366,955 I-75 I-75 over Saginaw River, GTW RR & M-13 Saginaw $40,135,394 I-69 6 bridges - St. Clair County St. Clair $12,841,442 I-94 4 Bridges, Saint Clair County St. Clair $9,452,000 M-102 M-102 over Plum Creek, Wayne County Wayne $6,081,371 I-94 EB and WB over Hickory Creek Berrien $6,513,000 M-96 M-96 (Columbia) over Raymond Road Calhoun $1,810,054 M-231 Over the Grand River (River Span) Ottawa $23,000,000 M-231 Over the Grand River (Approach Spans) Ottawa $46,000,000 M-231 Over Rich Street Ottawa $1,500,000 M-231 Over Buchanan Street Ottawa $1,600,000 M-231 Over Sleeper Street Ottawa $1,600,000 M-231 Over Little Robinson Creek Ottawa $7,500,000 I-96 At M-231 Ottawa $11,800,000 M-85 Over Rouge River, Detroit Wayne $47,092,500 TOTAL $229,292,716

2014 Route Location County Costs I-96 2 Bridges over I-96, Livonia, Wayne County Wayne $8,737,148 I-96 6 Bridges over I-96, Wayne County Wayne $10,885,774 US-10 M-47 NB and SB over US-10 Bay $4,345,546 M-13 Over Johnson Creek Bay $2,146,716 M-15 Over Cass River Bay $3,657,604 I-96 Under M-50 Kent $4,119,389 M-85 Over Conrail (ABANDONED) Wayne $4,242,402 M-22 Over Platte River Benzie $1,988,016 M-139 Over St. Joseph River, Niles Berrien $5,664,000 US-131 I-94 BL (Stadium Drive) Over US-131 Kalamazoo $6,934,973 I-96 US-23 NB over I-96 WB Livingston $1,635,576 I-96 5 structures in the I-96 / US-23 interchange Livingston $9,073,776 TOTAL $63,430,920

Paid for by Taxpayers Against Monopolies, 225 S. Washington Sq., Lansing, MI 48933 Six Good Reasons to vote NO on Proposal 6

1. Vote NO to protect our Constitution! 5. Vote NO to protect all bridges Proposal 6 is paid for by Matty Moroun, the billionaire Every bridge or tunnel construction project could owner of the 83-year old , to lock his need a vote! bridge monopoly into Michigan’s Constitution. The • Proposal 6 includes not just international bridges, but Ambassador Bridge currently controls 99% of all “any bridge or tunnel” in Michigan. commercial tra c between Detroit and Windsor. • This provision could jeopardize more than180 bridges Moroun’s monopoly allows them to charge the highest currently being built or planned through 2014. rates in the country. • Every bridge or tunnel project could need to collect more than 300,000 signatures for a statewide vote. 2. Vote NO to protect our new bridge! Proposal 6 is an eort to stop construction of the New • Proposal 6 could kill plans to build a new rail tunnel International Trade Crossing (NITC) bridge, which Canada between Detroit and Windsor to transport modern and Michigan agreed to this summer. The bridge will be rail cars. This project is critical to Michigan's goal of built and operated by the private sector but will be becoming an international trade hub. jointly owned by Michigan and Canada. • The NITC is supported by a broad-based coalition 6. Vote NO to protect Michigan's future including, Michigan's most respected business There is no provision in Proposal 6 in case of an emergency! organizations, businesses, labor unions and community • If something were to happen to any of our bridges or leaders. tunnels, we could not have a vote to replace it until the next election. 3. Vote NO to tell the billionaire he can’t buy our vote! • The legislature cannot put a proposal on the ballot; signatures would have to be collected to put a proposal In spite of what the Proposal 6 ads say: on the general election ballot. • There is NO cost to Michigan taxpayers. Canada has agreed to pay Michigan’s share. Proposal 6, • 10,000 to 15,000 Michigan workers will build the Michigan side of the bridge project, while Canadians Dangerous to our Constitution, will build the Canadian side. Our Jobs and our Future • Only North American steel from both the U.S. and Canada, will be used in the bridge construction.

4. Vote NO to protect Michigan jobs! Besides construction jobs that are in jeopardy if Proposal 6 passes: • Michigan trade with Canada supports 218,000 jobs that are in jeopardy if the Ambassador Bridge is not able to provide reliable access for goods and people. • More than 25,000 new jobs would be supported by the new bridge. • More than $2 billion in new federal road funding will be available to Michigan if we move forward on the new bridge, supporting 20,000 Michigan construction jobs.

Paid for by Taxpayers Against Monopolies, 225 S. Washington Sq., Lansing Michigan 48933

Good for Moroun. Bad for Michigan.

• This proposal has nothing to do with allowing voters to decide. It’s an outrageous attempt by the Moroun family to protect their monopoly by hijacking our state’s constitution. The want to virtually guarantee that they will never have any competition for commercial traffic between Detroit and Windsor.

• Our state’s Constitution is no place to put these individual carve-outs for specific industries or in this case one family. Decisions on the building of building of certain bridges and roads should not be cluttering our Constitution and should not be gumming up our ballots every year.

• Under this proposal, there would have to be another vote in 2014 to approve the NITC project in a statewide and local election. It’s designed to delay the project for another two years at the cost of 10,000 jobs.

Unintended Consequences

Here is an example of the negative impact of putting Proposal 6 in our Constitution:

• This proposal will also mean that the proposed expansion of the rail tunnel between Detroit and Windsor could force the owners of the current tunnel to go to the a state-wide and local ballot to expand the tunnel. This tunnel is a crucial part of the plan to make Detroit an intermodal transportation hub that will be a huge boost our local economy. Proposal 6 would put that in jeopardy.

• The proposal is so sloppily worded that it says it requires a vote on any international bridge and then defines an international bridge as any bridge or tunnel not open to public as of January 1, 2012. This appears to mean that any bridge or tunnel across any river, creek, road or ditch would be included and require a statewide and local vote. This would be a disaster for the state and cost millions in elections

• If there were an emergency or accident or act terrorism, we would have to wait until the next general election to vote on the building of a new bridge. Potentially delaying the process for up to two years.

Brian Calley: Hindering new bridge will hurt Michigan

Lansing State Journal

By Brian Calley

Michigan’s constitution is a document that enshrines our values and establishes the basic framework of our government. It should not be a special-interest smorgasbord where amendments are added to protect the comforts of a select few.

But that’s precisely what it would become under Proposal 6.

Proposal 6 is simply the gambit of one billionaire’s well-funded special interest that is trying to hijack the constitution. The scheme is to maintain a stranglehold on the busiest trade corridor along the border between the two largest trade partners in the world — the U.S. and Canada.

Today, Canadians buy nearly half of what Michigan exports and consume 20 percent of everything Michigan farmers grow. Detroit-Windsor is one of the busiest trade corridors in America. Yet over 99 percent of commercial traffic is forced over one crossing – the Ambassador Bridge.

Relying on one 84-year-old bridge in one of the busiest trade corridors is an economic risk both for Michigan and the United States, and it’s a security risk and a maintenance risk that we cannot afford.

That’s why we need a modern, end-to-end, freeway-to-freeway connection between Michigan and Canada.

The new bridge between Detroit and Canada — known as the New International Trade Crossing — is all about jobs. Today, about 237,000 Michigan jobs depend on trade with Canada. Regionally, it’s one in eight jobs in Southeast Michigan. In West Michigan, it’s one in seven jobs. Under an agreement reached with Canada, we can build a new bridge at no cost to Michigan taxpayers, create 10,000 construction related jobs, and boost our economy all across the state by making it easier to trade with other markets. When we look at spurring economic growth in Michigan, the new bridge is a critical part of that future. The benefits are tremendous.

In addition to the obvious economic gains, Michigan can leverage Canada’s $550 million contribution to maximize federal funding for much-needed road projects in every corner of the state. And, let’s be clear. This is a contribution from Canada to connect the new bridge to the Michigan freeway system, not a loan. Under our legally binding agreement, Michigan is under no obligation to pay it back.

There’s something else for voters to consider. Because Proposal 6 is so poorly worded, we believe it could require any bridge project in Michigan to go through a statewide vote — not just international crossings. Imagine forcing voters in Marquette to vote on whether a local bridge is needed in Monroe. The administrative and cost burdens could be enormous and wasteful.

When it comes to making decisions on whether to amend the constitution, it’s critical that we look at all of the consequences — even those that are unintended.

Michigan’s future is filled with boundless potential. Don’t let one special interest stand in the way of progress for working families and exciting opportunities for our next generation.

Paid for by Taxpayers Against Monopolies, 225 S. Washington Sq., Lansing, MI 48933

Editorial: How bridge proposal would boost government costs

Detroit Free Press

October 4, 2012

Proposal 6, which requires voter approval of new international bridges or tunnels, includes a provision that would bar the Legislature from even putting such a project before voters.

If the amendment championed by public bridge opponent Matty Moroun passes, voters would be able to approve a new bridge or tunnel only after a successful petition drive to place it on the ballot.

The full amendment, which is only summarized on the ballot voters will see Nov. 6, says:

“The procedure for seeking a determination by majority vote of the people under this section shall be that procedure provided by law for the submission and approval of petitions to propose, enact, and reject laws by initiative.”

It gets worse: Under the initiative procedure outlined in the constitution, the Legislature can approve any law proposed in a successful petition drive. But Proposal six would mandate a popular vote on any petition to build a new international bridge or tunnel.

So even if the state Transportation Department and the Legislature agree a new bridge or tunnel is needed, they would still have to pay someone to collect hundreds of thousands of signatures to put it on the ballot. That’s not a reasonable way to govern.

Paid for by Taxpayers Against Monopolies, 225 S. Washington Sq., Lansing, MI 48933

Experts say new international bridge won't cost Michigan taxpayers

By John Gallagher Detroit Free Press Business Writer

Claims that have bombarded Michigan voters for months that taxpayers will be stuck with the bill for a multi-billion dollar bridge to Canada are not based in reality, said three independent law professors asked by the Free Press to review an international Crossing Agreement signed in June.

The advertising campaign from the People Should Decide, a group financially backed by Ambassador Bridge owner Manuel (Matty) Moroun and his family, has pushed that consistent message in several rounds of anti-bridge ads that are misleading, said two advertising experts who reviewed a recently released ad, also at the request of the Free Press.

Jennifer Henderson, a law professor at University of Detroit Mercy, John Mogk, a law professor at Wayne State University, and Marcia Valiante of the University of Windsor said the Crossing Agreement between Gov. and Canadian Transport Minister Denis Lebel is crystal clear that Canada pays for the bridge and then recoups Michigan's share, about $550 million, from future bridge tolls -- not from Michigan taxpayers.

"It very clearly says it's not funded by Michigan. ... And throughout the agreement those words are repeated," Henderson said.

Even so, the two ad experts say the anti-bridge message might be resonating because it's working like political attack ads -- thumping a single message even if it's short on context or supportable facts.

The People Should Decide says its analysis of bridge finances is sound and that approval of Snyder's New International Trade Crossing, and other projects like it, should be put to citizen votes. They say its consultant has determined costs for the bridge will skyrocket and that other "hidden costs" will saddle Michigan taxpayers with unwanted expenses for the next 50 years.

Recent ads claim the new bridge will end up costing $8 billion -- nearly four times the official estimate -- and force Michigan to lay off police and teachers and even tap senior citizen pensions to cover the cost. "Will the ad be effective? Probably. Is it legal? Probably. Is it ethical or fair? Probably not," said Hugh Cannon, a professor of advertising at Wayne State University.

Ballot issue in play

The Free Press asked the local professors for their opinions in light of a Moroun-backed ballot referendum, which, if approved, would create a constitutional requirement that any new international bridge or tunnel get a statewide and local vote before Michigan could spend any money. The referendum language says it would apply retroactively, impacting the NITC, to be built 2 miles downstream from the Ambassador. That issue, however, likely would be decided in court if the referendum passes, legal experts have said.

Mickey Blashfield, director of government relations for the Moroun business network and head of the People Should Decide effort, points out that the Crossing Agreement contains a clause that allows the terms to be changed in the future, which, he says, could mean a reshuffling of financial responsibilities. And a reworking of that agreement, he said, is more likely in the event of construction cost overruns and shortfalls in future toll revenue, according to the recent study paid for by the Moroun-backed group.

"Different experts have tackled this cost issue from different angles, but the one thing they all seem to agree on is the fact that there's no such thing as a free bridge," said Blashfield, whose group commissioned O'Keefe & Associates financial consulting firm of Bloomfield Hills to examine the new bridge project's financial structure. "With so much on the line, the people deserve the right to decide how public money is best spent."

Major corporations, including Detroit's three auto companies, Honda, Toyota and various auto suppliers, back the NITC project, plus multiple business groups across the state, including the three largest chamber organizations -- Detroit Regional Chamber, Grand Rapids Chamber and Traverse City Area Chamber of Commerce. They call the bridge a boon for Michigan's economic future, saying traffic across the NITC inevitably will increase as the economy in Michigan and Ontario expands and the advantages of the new modern bridge become apparent to users.

Brad Williams, vice president of government relations for the Detroit chamber, said Detroit needs another international crossing option because drivers who cross the Ambassador Bridge have to contend with 18 stoplights in Windsor.

He said many European goods making their way into the U.S. arrive to Canada at its deepwater port in Halifax, Nova Scotia, but the trucks carrying those goods need a more efficient way to cross the border into the U.S.that doesn't involve navigating Windsor traffic.

"Detroit is a logical choice. There's a real opportunity here to build out a transportation, distribution and logistics industry," Williams said. "The auto industry is completely integrated between Ontario and Michigan." Checking the claims

The Michigan Truth Squad, an effort connected with the nonprofit Center for Michigan think tank, issued a "flagrant foul," its toughest verdict, against the People Should Decide's claims made in advertisements, mainly that Michigan taxpayers will end up paying for the bridge and that the state's debt load will increase because of it. The group characterizes a flagrant foul as a "statement that distorts or incorrectly states a fact."

The group explains its verdict on its website: "These ads repeat claims, or advance new variants of old claims, that do not match available documents. The agreement with Canada puts the financial onus on Michigan's neighbor, not Michigan, for paying the bills, including interest. Since Michigan is not appropriating construction dollars, no dollars are being diverted away from other public uses. Michigan is not increasing its debt load with the NITC project."

The group said it is evenhanded in its assessments and looks at political commercials and speeches, issue advertisements, news releases, political websites and white papers. The group examines claims suggested by the public.

There have been several rounds of Moroun-backed ads that all push the idea that the cost of the bridge to be covered by Canada will somehow backfire on Michigan taxpayers. The Moroun-backed group has spent an estimated $10 million so far on the ads.

A recent ad called "Tough Choices," says the bridge will become so expensive that Michigan would be forced to lose "quality teachers, cops on the beat, firefighters and EMTs," and to reduce pension payments to seniors.

"Real cuts hurting real people," the voice-over says. "Now that we know how much this bridge could cost us, shouldn't the people decide?"

Cannon of WSU said the ad and others like it are dangerous because they are "deliberately using misleading imagery to "push the electorate to a certain decision," which "undermines the very foundations of our political system."

At the same time, Michael Bernacchi, a professor at University of Detroit Mercy, said the ads may be effective simply because they're so bold and aggressive.

"I wouldn't like to be combating this from the other side," he said. "They're out there first. They've been out there for a considerable amount of time with a single message. It's developed a whole brand -- it's simple: 'No bridge.' "

Lt. Gov. Brian Calley, who serves as Snyder's point man on bridge issues, condemned the "Tough Choices" ad.

"Their claims keep getting more bizarre," he said. "They're throwing out numbers. I don't know what's next. One hundred billion? A trillion? They don't seem to be bound by any factual information."

New anti-NITC ads starting this week follow the same story line as the others, depicting ordinary people worrying about their finances as the expense of a new bridge looms, threatening their futures. Central to the Moroun case is the claim that Michiganders will get stuck paying for the bridge despite contractual assurances to the contrary.

The legal ties

The Free Press asked the three law professors to review the Crossing Agreement language and give their opinions about the strength of protections for Michigan taxpayers in the document.

Valiante of the University of Windsor said, "The basic concept is that Canada will pay for everything up front then will recoup those costs through tolls and other revenues."

Mogk, an expert at WSU on development issues, said, "I think it's airtight on that question."

On the first page of the agreement, it says the project will be built "with funding approved by Canada, but with no funding by the Michigan Parties. The Michigan Parties are not obligated to pay any of the costs of the new International Crossing."

And on page 30 of the agreement, it says, "The Michigan Parties shall not be required to fund any International Crossing Costs, Michigan Interchange Costs, U.S. Federal Plaza Costs, Crossing Authority Costs or International Authority Costs."

There are multiple similar references throughout the agreement.

Henderson noted that the agreement does state that the parties could amend the document in the future, which could mean some new payment scheme that might include a cost to Michigan. But she said major changes are only a theoretical possibility and not something likely to happen.

Change of heart?

Blashfield, head of the People Should Decide, contends it's more than theoretical and a likely scenario as the Canadians find themselves responsible for a bridge that cost too much and with fewer tolls than predicted to cover the tab.

He pointed out that any shortfall in tolls allows Canada to collect its amount due plus interest from future revenues, creating a snowball effect moving forward that will push up the bridge cost to more than $8 billion, according to a study commissioned by the People Should Decide from the O'Keefe & Associates financial consulting firm of Bloomfield Hills. Patrick O'Keefe, founder and CEO of the firm, told the Free Press the figure assumes a 10% cost overrun on construction costs, a 20% shortfall on toll revenue and a 50-year time frame for the mounting debt and interest to grow.

The analysis doesn't explain how Michigan taxpayers would become responsible for the financial burden -- which, according to the crossing agreement, belongs to Canada -- nor does it assess the likelihood of toll revenues falling short.

According to the firm's website, O'Keefe "is recognized as an expert in the fields of corporate reorganization, debt restructuring, turnaround consulting, refinancing solutions, due diligence support, valuation and litigation support."

Blashfield said other "hidden costs" of the project also will burden Michigan taxpayers over the years. Among those:

• Tolls on the Blue Water Bridge that now go to Michigan will in part go to Canada in the future as some traffic diverts to the new bridge.

• Homeowners in Detroit's Delray neighborhood, where the new bridge will land, will no longer pay property taxes once they've been moved out.

• Workers employed by the Ambassador Bridge who might lose their jobs to competition from the new bridge will pay less income tax.

Backers of the new bridge respond that new commerce generated by a more modern and efficient bridge will more than make up for any incidental economic losses, including employing its own bridge operators and construction workers. The new bridge will be wider, have more modern plazas on either end and provide seamless connections to expressways on both sides of the border.

The backers, including the governor's office, point out that Delray is an economically downtrodden area with high unemployment, and most residents there are happy to be bought out so they can move.

Carl Smith, 60, favors construction of a new bridge, even if it means he will be forced to move from the Delray neighborhood where he has lived most of his life.

"It's going to create jobs. It's going to create jobs during construction and it's going to create jobs when it opens," he said.

Paid for by Taxpayers Against Monopolies, 225 S. Washington Sq., Lansing, MI 48933

The People Should Decide - Anti-New Detroit Bridge TV Ads

Michigan Truth Squad

Who: The People Should Decide Featured Campaign Material: TV ads Truth Squad call: Flagrant foul

The People Should Decide is a ballot question committee funded, according to available campaign finance statements, almost entirely from interests linked to Ambassador Bridge owner Manuel Moroun and his family. Proposal 6 is a constitutional amendment to require a public vote before the state of Michigan could participate in an international bridge or tunnel project. The proposal is aimed at the Next International Trade Crossing, a bridge between Detroit and Windsor that will compete with Moroun’s Ambassador for freight and passenger traffic.

QUESTIONABLE STATEMENTS:

“It may end up being free during their term in office, but eventually we the people are going to be paying big for it.”

The primary line of attack used by Moroun interests against the NITC project has been the “public will pay” claim. As far back as 2010, the government of Canada extended an offer to cover Michigan’s $550 million share of initial costs for the project, which Canada would cover with tolls. That offer, along with a pledge by Canada to cover the bills should tolls prove insufficient, is incorporated in the agreement signed June 15.

“Quit being so arrogant with our money.”

What money? The ad does not say. The agreement between Michigan and Canada places the financial onus of the NITC project on the Canadian and U.S. governments (the federal government will fund the cost of the customs plaza on the Michigan side of the bridge).

The Michigan Department of Transportation calculated that $42 million has been spent on studies and planning regarding a second Detroit-Windsor bridge.

“That’s our money that the politicians are spending.”

Again, “our money” is not explained.

“There’s a huge Michigan debt clock that’s ticking and getting bigger all the time.”

This is a new claim from the Moroun camp. The phrase “debt clock” evokes the ongoing national debate over the federal debt and websites, such as this one, that track its movements.

The most recent comprehensive financial report for state government, for the year ending Sept. 30, 2011, reported, “The state’s total long-term bonded debt as of September 30, 2011, was $7.3 billion, an increase of $268.6 million from the prior year. The increase represents the net difference between new issuances, payments, and refundings of debt.”

Between fiscal 2010 and fiscal 2011, the state's total liabilities grew by about $800 million. During the same span, the state's total assets grew by about $1.4 billion.

Michigan’s general bond rating, from the rating agency Standard & Poor’s, was AA- in May 2012, down from a rating of AAA (the highest) in 2002.

It is not clear how this reference applies to the NITC project or Proposal 6 since the state of Michigan, under the June 15 agreement, is not incurring debt.

“We can’t go out and start building bridges. Our grand kids are going to have to pay that off.”

See above on reference to agreement between Canada and Michigan for Canada to cover bridge project’s costs.

For context, the Michigan Department of Transportation says it owns 4,407 National Highway System structures greater than 20 feet long. A count including all agencies of NHS bridges longer than 20 feet yields 10,967.

“How can they tell us there’s no money for education and schools, but there’s money for a bridge.”

Again, the June 15 agreement puts the onus on Canada to fund construction of the bridge project. The Legislature has not made an appropriation for construction costs for NITC. The state funds “education and schools” primarily through the School Aid Fund, a restricted state account.

“Somebody’s going to end up paying for that bridge, and it’s going to be our children.”

Again, there is no explanation for this claim. Canada is pledged to finance construction, including Michigan’s share, and recover its investment via tolls collected. If tolls are insufficient, the June 15 agreement puts Canada in charge of covering the difference.

“Do you know how many police, firefighters, teachers, could we hire with the money they’re going to spend on this bridge?”

Another leading and unsupported claim. State dollars have not been appropriated to build the bridge. In fact, it’s possible to construct a reverse argument on this point:

Gov. Rick Snyder negotiated with the federal government to allow Michigan to use the $550 million state “share” (which Canada is covering) toward the state’s total investment for federal matching funds for highway work. As detailed in this report from the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor, that deal will mean $2.2 billion in federal highway funds – which can be spent across the state. Such federal funds, in theory, would lessen pressure on state lawmakers to appropriate money from the state general fund for road work – general fund money that also can be used to bolster police, fire and school ranks.

For further context, Moroun family interests have been the primary funders – say the most recent campaign documents available – of Proposal 5, a constitutional amendment that would require supermajorities of the Legislature to enact tax changes. If Prop 5 passes, the likelihood of investments in new police officers, firefighters and teachers will be less, not more.

OVERALL IMPRESSION:

The battle over a second bridge is about money – the Moroun family’s money. The expectation is that a second bridge will reduce traffic on the existing Ambassador, thereby costing the Moroun family money. There is a reason that the family interests have spent millions in campaign contributions, lobbying efforts and TV ads in recent years to stop the NITC project – not to mention what sums have been spent by Moroun interests in legal challenges to the project.

Michigan voters may want to ask themselves one question: Why are Moroun family interests spending millions to “protect” the average taxpayer?

TRUTH SQUAD CALL:

Flagrant foul. These ads repeat claims, or advance new variants of old claims, that do not match available documents. The agreement with Canada puts the financial onus on Michigan’s neighbor, not Michigan, for paying the bills, including interest. Since Michigan is not appropriating construction dollars, no dollars are being diverted away from other public uses. Michigan is not increasing its debt load with the NITC project.

Paid for by Taxpayers Against Monopolies, 225 S. Washington Sq., Lansing, MI 48933

NOVEMBER

2012 BALLOT PROPOSAL 12-6

An Overview

Prepared by Patrick Affholter, Legislative Analyst and Joe Carrasco, Fiscal Analyst

Ellen Jeffries, Director

Phone (517) 373-2768

http://www.senate.michigan.gov/sfa Senate Fiscal Senate Agency

1 On November 6, 2012, Michigan voters will decide whether to adopt an amendment to the State Constitution regarding the expenditure of State funds for the construction or improvement of international bridges or tunnels for motor vehicles. Proposal 12-6 is the result of a citizen initiative petition to amend the Constitution. Proposal 12-6 will appear on the ballot as follows:

A PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE STATE CONSTITUTION REGARDING CONSTRUCTION OF INTERNATIONAL BRIDGES AND TUNNELS

This proposal would:

 Require the approval of a majority of voters at a statewide election and in each municipality where "new international bridges or tunnels for motor vehicles" are to be located before the State of Michigan may expend state funds or resources for acquiring land, designing, soliciting bids for, constructing, financing, or promoting new international bridges or tunnels.

 Create a definition of "new international bridges or tunnels for motor vehicles" that means "any bridge or tunnel which is not open to the public and serving traffic as of January 1, 2012."

Should this proposal be approved?

If a majority of the electors vote "yes", Proposal 12-6 will be adopted as Article III, Section 6a of the State Constitution.

Summary

The proposed constitutional amendment specifies that the people should decide whether the State may construct or finance new international bridges or tunnels. It would prohibit the State from undertaking ownership and development of, or using State funds or resources for, new international bridges or tunnels for motor vehicles unless a majority vote of the people first determined those actions to be necessary and appropriate.

The procedure for seeking a majority vote of the people would be the same as that for submission and approval of petitions to propose, enact, and reject laws by initiative under Article II, Section 9 of the Constitution. That is, proponents would have to gather signatures of registered voters equal to at least 8% of the total vote cast for all candidates for Governor at the last general election at which a Governor was elected. A proposal seeking approval for a new international bridge or tunnel, however, would not be subject to the provision under Article II, Section 9 that allows approval by the Legislature in lieu of a vote of the people. Approval of the people for a new international bridge or tunnel would require an affirmative vote of a majority of electors in both the State and each municipality in which improvements were to be situated.

Proposal 12-6 specifies that any ambiguity in its interpretation "shall be resolved in favor of shielding the people from practical or financial burdens associated with state government ownership and development of international bridges and tunnels for motor vehicles".

Background

There has long been a discussion about the need for a new international crossing between southeastern Michigan and southern Ontario. Canadian officials and some Michigan officials and business groups have expressed a desire for a new bridge, located downriver from the Ambassador Bridge, which connects Detroit, Michigan, and Windsor, Ontario. According to proponents of a new bridge, a crossing at the proposed location could connect more easily 2 to expressways in both countries, especially Canada. Others, including officials of the company that owns the Ambassador Bridge, have questioned the need for an additional crossing and suggested that, if one is desired, they could build it adjacent to the current bridge.

In June 2012, the Governor of Michigan entered into an agreement with Canada to create an authority for the design, construction, operation, and maintenance of a new international crossing. (This Crossing Agreement is discussed below.) After that agreement was executed, opponents of the proposed new bridge began the initiative petition drive that resulted in Proposal 12-6.

While the ballot proposal would prohibit the State of Michigan from undertaking ownership and development of, or using State funds or resources for, new international crossings for motor vehicles without a State and local vote of the people, there is disagreement as to whether Proposal 12-6 would apply to the Crossing Agreement already entered into between Michigan and Canada.

The potential scope of Proposal 12-6 is another matter of uncertainty. This is because the definition of "new international bridges or tunnels for motor vehicles" refers to "any bridge or tunnel" that is not open to the public and serving traffic as of January 1, 2012 (emphasis added). Arguably, the constitutional amendment could apply to all bridge and tunnel projects involving State resources, regardless of whether they were international, including bridges that are currently planned but not yet built.

Crossing Agreement between Canada and Michigan

On June 15, 2012, a Crossing Agreement was executed between Canada and Michigan. The parties are Canada, as represented by the Minister of Transport; the Crossing Authority, an entity to be established by Canada pursuant to and subject to the laws of Canada after the initial Execution Date; and the State of Michigan, as represented by the Governor, and by and through the Michigan Department of Transportation, and the Michigan Strategic Fund, i.e., the "Michigan Parties".

A synopsis of the Agreement states:

"The Crossing Agreement provides a framework for a Crossing Authority established by Canada to design, construct, finance, operate and maintain a new International Crossing between Canada and Michigan, under the oversight of a jointly established International Authority with three members appointed by Canada and the Crossing Authority and three members appointed by the Michigan Parties, and with funding approved by Canada, but with no funding by the Michigan Parties. The Michigan Parties are not obligated to pay any of the costs of the new International Crossing."

According to the Agreement, all three parties (Canada, the Crossing Authority, and the Michigan Parties) have the power and authority to enter into and carry out its obligations as a party to the Agreement.

The Agreement also points out that the State of Michigan has the power and constitutional authority under Article III, Section 5 of the Michigan Constitution, to enter into and carry out its obligations as a Party to the Agreement, subject to its terms and conditions. Section 5 of Article III of the Michigan Constitution states, in part:

"Subject to provisions of general law, this state or any political subdivision thereof, any governmental authority or any combination thereof may enter into agreements for the performance, financing or execution of their respective functions, with any one or more of

3 the other states, the United States, the Dominion of Canada, or any political subdivision thereof unless otherwise provided in this constitution."

Fiscal Impact

Adoption of Proposal 12-6 could result in a significant cost to the State and/or local governments associated with the expense of holding an election to allow the State of Michigan to spend State funds or resources to build any new international bridge or tunnel for motor vehicles. According to the Michigan Department of State, the cost of any election is an estimated $2,000 per voting precinct. There are approximately 5,200 voting precincts across Michigan. If voter approval were sought in conjunction with an already scheduled "general election" in November of an even-numbered year, there would be no additional costs. However, if voter approval were sought in a special election, those costs would be an estimated $2,000 per voting precinct, or an estimated $10.4 million total.

Regarding the interpretation of the term "new international bridges or tunnels", there is the potential that funding for the construction of new bridges elsewhere in the State could be in jeopardy. For fiscal year 2012-13, the Department of Transportation budget includes $80.2 million for the construction of new bridges.

4

Here is What People Are Saying About…

Proposal 6

“Proposal 6 is simply the gambit of one billionaire’s well-funded special interest that is trying to hijack the constitution. The scheme is to maintain a stranglehold on the busiest trade corridor along the border between the two largest trade partners in the world – the U.S. and Canada.” – Brian Calley, Lt. Governor, State of Michigan

“As for Proposal 6, I have repeatedly stated that taxpayers should not be put on the hook for debt nor operation costs for a new international bridge in Detroit. Although the governor’s proposal on the Detroit bridge does not do that, this proposal is not about one bridge but likely all bridges in Michigan. I am concerned that the language in this amendment could lead to making it more costly, time consuming and difficult to replace many bridges, tunnels and crossings. Due to the federal matching dollars program, it also may hamper the ability of many Michigan residents to see their locally needed bridges and infrastructure improved. While it may be tempting to put one contentious project up for a vote, Michigan has many bridge crossings, and the one new proposal in Detroit is not the only one that could be impacted by this change.” – Representative

"I don't like people coming in and mucking around with our Constitution." – Senator Mike Kowall

“Proposal six would mandate a popular vote on any petition to build a new international bridge or tunnel. So even if the state Transportation Department and the Legislature agree a new bridge or tunnel is needed, they would still have to pay someone to collect hundreds of thousands of signatures to put it on the ballot. That’s not a reasonable way to govern.” – Detroit Free Press Editorial

“Prop 6 would inappropriately interject economic policy in the state constitution. This is a dreadful misreading of the purpose constitutions serve. Let’s get this bridge built. Vote no.” – The Detroit News Editorial

“Voters – even those who aren’t convinced that the new bridge is a good idea – should vote NO on Proposal 6. Such a law has no place in the state constitution.” – Livingston Daily “The constitutional amendment could apply to all bridge and tunnel projects involving State resources, regardless of whether they were international, including bridges that are currently planned but not yet built." – Senate Fiscal Agency

Proposal 6 Advertising

“The battle over a second bridge is about money – the Moroun family’s money. The expectation is that a second bridge will reduce traffic on the existing Ambassador, thereby costing the Moroun family money. There is a reason that the family interests have spent millions in campaign contributions, lobbying efforts and TV ads in recent years to stop the NITC project – not to mention what sums have been spent by Moroun interests in legal challenges to the project.

Michigan voters may want to ask themselves one question: Why are Moroun family interests spending millions to “protect” the average taxpayer?

These ads repeat claims, or advance new variants of old claims, that do not match available documents. The agreement with Canada puts the financial onus on Michigan’s neighbor, not Michigan, for paying the bills, including interest. Since Michigan is not appropriating construction dollars, no dollars are being diverted away from other public uses. Michigan is not increasing its debt load with the NITC project." – The Michigan Truth Squad

“This campaign season, if nothing else, should educate people that we can’t believe everything we see on TV. At the bottom of page one of the agreement, the very last sentence says, ‘The State of Michigan is not responsible for any costs of this crossing.” – Kirk Steudle, Director, Michigan Department of Transportation

“Their television advertising tells some very big lies. They complain that the bridge will cost Michigan taxpayers $2 billion or $8 billion up front, and then $100 million a year. Totally wrong. The bridge will cost Michigan taxpayers nothing, It’s time that somebody exposed these lies.” – Roy Norton, Consul General of Canada

The Need for the New Bridge

“Thanks to an iron-clad agreement, we can build a new bridge to Canada without any cost to Michigan taxpayers. The project will help industries all across our state grow stronger which would lead to important long-term job creation. In the short term, it will help create 10,000 new construction jobs. The new bridge will be a great benefit for our state, and we shouldn’t let one billionaire and his special interest monopoly get in the way.” – Rick Snyder, Governor, State of Michigan

“It will accelerate our growth and advance our manufacturing. The better the logistics, the better efficiency there will be in getting our goods into the market place. The more opportunities that creates for our region. We have a great opportunity (through a new bridge and rail tunnel) to create something special for our region. We can be the next great logistics hub, the top gateway for North America.” – Sandy Baruah, President and CEO, Detroit Regional Chamber

“This important project will create many thousands of well-paid construction jobs and additional spin-off jobs during construction, and up to 750 permanent jobs to operate the facility. These jobs would be welcome for the hard-hit construction industry and the additional employment will contribute to the already substantial reduction in unemployment in Michigan. The completion of a new span at the most commercially significant border crossing in the United States is important for the automobile industry and expanded trade in general. The automobile industry in the U.S. and Canada is highly integrated, and depends on quick and easy border crossing for components and completed vehicles. Completion of the NITC will assure adequate border mobility for the auto industry for many decades into the future.” – Bob King, United Auto Workers

Who Pays for the New Bridge?

“The Michigan Parties shall not be required to fund any International Crossing Costs, Michigan Interchange Costs, U.S. Federal Plaza Costs, Crossing Authority Costs or International Authority Costs.” – New International Trade Crossing Agreement

“It very clearly says it’s not funded by Michigan…and throughout the agreement those words are repeated.” – Jennifer Henderson, Professor of Law, University of Detroit Mercy

“The contract is quite explicit and clear that the State of Michigan incurs no obligation, no legal obligation, to pay for the construction or the maintenance of the crossing.” – Dan Crane, Professor of Law, University of Michigan

Paid for by Taxpayers Against Monopolies, 225 S. Washington Sq., Lansing, MI 48933

Supporters of the New International Trade Crossing

MICHIGAN GOVERNORS Governor Rick Snyder Governor Jennifer Granholm Governor James Blanchard Governor John Engler Governor

AUTOMAKERS Chrysler General Motors Honda Toyota

CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE Ann Arbor/Ypsilanti Regional Chamber of Commerce Canadian Chamber of Commerce Chamber of Commerce Grand Haven, Spring Lake, Ferrysburg Cornerstone Chamber of Commerce Delta County Area Chamber of Commerce Detroit Regional Chamber of Commerce Grand Rapids Area Chamber of Commerce Holland Area Chamber of Commerce Jackson County Chamber of Commerce Kalamazoo Regional Chamber of Commerce Lakes Area Chamber of Commerce Lansing Regional Chamber of Commerce Michigan Chamber of Commerce Michigan Hispanic Chamber of Commerce Muskegon Area Chamber of Commerce Northern Michigan Regional Chamber Alliance Novi Chamber of Commerce Ontario Chamber of Commerce Sault Area Chamber of Commerce Southern Wayne Regional Chamber of Commerce Traverse City Area Chamber of Commerce U.S. Chamber of Commerce Windsor-Essex Regional Chamber of Commerce

LEADING NEWSPAPERS AND POLITICAL WRITERS Argus-Press and Guide CCN Matthews News Distribution Experts Dearborn Press & Guide Detroit Free Press Detroit News Grand Rapids Press Jackson Citizen Patriot Lansing State Journal The Daily Tribune The Globe and Mail The Holland Sentinel The News Herald Toledo Blade Traverse City Record-Eagle

AGRI-BUSINESS ORGANIZATIONS GreenStone Farm Credit Services Hacienda Mexican Foods Michigan Agri-Business Association Michigan Allied Poultry Industries Inc. Michigan Farm Bureau Michigan Milk Producers Association Potato Growers of Michigan Inc.

BUSINESSES Access Engineering Advanced Geomatics Alfred Benesch & Company American Axle & Manufacturing, Inc. Amway Corp. Backstrom McCarley Berry & Co., LLC Barton Malow BASF Brose North America, Inc. C3 Development Consulting Campbell Soup Company CH2M Hill Clairvoyant Energy Cliffs Natural Resources Consumers Energy Continental Automotive Systems Conway Corradino Group of Michigan, Inc. CZAE Dart Container Corporation Delta Airlines Detroit Logistics Company Detroit-Windsor Truck Ferry Elaham Shayota LLC

Elsey Construction Products Evans Group Ex-Imp Global Fishbeck, Thompson, Carr & Huber, Inc. Gannett Fleming of Michigan, Inc. Hausbeck Pickles & Peppers Herman Miller HH Engineering, Ltd. HNTB Michigan, Inc. James Group International Kellogg Company Lear Corporation Magna Masco Corporation Meijer, Inc. Meritor, Inc. Northwest Consultants, Inc. NTH Consultants, Inc. OHL USA, Inc. OHM Advisors Opus International Consultants, Inc. Parsons Parsons Brinkerhoff Precision Manufactured Products Ryder Supply Chain Solutions Somat Engineering, Inc. Steelcase, Inc. Surveying Solutions, Inc. TesTech, Inc. The Mannik & Smith Group, Inc. THI – Extang/Truxedo/BedRug/UnderCover/Advantage Transystems TRW Automotive TY Lin International Universal Forestry Products URS Corporation URS Corporation Great Lakes Walbridge Wolverine World Wide, Inc. Xtreme Power

TRANSPORTATION AND GOVERNMENT LEADERS City of Sault Ste Marie City of Wixom County Road Association of Michigan David Bing, Mayor of Detroit Detroit City Council Downtown Development Authority of the City of River Rouge Eddie Francis, Mayor of Windsor Grand Valley Metro Council Indiana General Assembly (House and Senate) Kevin Hinkley, Mayor of Wixom L. Brooks Patterson, Oakland County Executive Michigan Association of Counties Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development Monroe County Industrial Development Corporation Oakland County Business Roundtable Ohio House of Representatives Ohio Senate Robert A. Ficano, Wayne County Executive Road Commission for Oakland County SEMCOG Steve Tobocman, former State Representative The National Industrial Transportation League Wayne County Commission

LABOR UNIONS Canadian Auto Workers Canadian Teamsters, Local 879 International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 324 International Union, UAW Laborers International Union of North America, Local 625 Michigan Regional Council of Carpenters & Millwrights Michigan State AFL-CIO The Michigan Building and Construction Trades Council Utility Workers Union of America

BUSINESS ORGANIZATIONS AND COMMUNITY ASSOCIATIONS Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers American Council of Engineering Companies of Michigan American Iron and Steel Institute Ann Arbor SPARK Associated General Contractors of Michigan Auto Dealers of Michigan Automation Alley Automotive Parts Manufacturers Association Battle Creek/Calhoun County/Kalamazoo County Inland Port Development Corporation Battle Creek Unlimited Building Owners and Managers Association of Metro Detroit Business Leaders for Michigan Canadian Automotive Partnership Council Canadian Industrial Transportation Association Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters Canadian Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association Council of Great Lakes Industries Economic Alliance for Michigan Gateway Communities Development Collaborative Great Lakes Commission Hispanic Business Owners & Professionals Lake Superior Community Partnership Michigan Aggregates Association

Michigan Bankers Association Michigan Infrastructure & Transportation Association Michigan Manufacturers Association Motor and Equipment Manufacturers Association National Association of Manufacturers Ontario Road Builders' Association Ontario Trucking Association Original Equipment Suppliers Association Southwest Detroit Community Benefits Coalition The Right Place

Paid for by Taxpayers Against Monopolies, 225 S. Washington Sq., Lansing, MI 48933 The New International Trade Crossing

July 2012

The new New International Trade Crossing is an investment in the future of the North American economy, of North American trade, and of North American manufacturing.

Background On June 15, 2012 Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Governor Rick Snyder announced an Agreement between Canada and Michigan to build a new publicly owned bridge between Detroit, Michigan and Windsor, Ontario. The crossing agreement establishes the framework for Canada’s and Michigan’s roles and responsibilities for the construction, financing operation and maintenance of the new international crossing. Benefits of the New International Trade Crossing The new bridge will provide a needed alternative at the busiest Canada–U.S. commercial border crossing, facilitating the movement of people and goods by ensuring border crossing capacity for the next 125 years.

• By providing the first-ever freeway-to-freeway • The new bridge will further support national security connection at Detroit-Windsor and a ‘post-9/11’ and public safety priorities in Canada and the U.S., customs footprint vastly larger than the existing enhancing the initiatives in the Border Action Plan plazas, the new bridge will reduce delays due announced by Prime Minister Harper and President to congestion and the massive costs associated Obama in December, 2011. Having two profitable with them. No alternative project has authorization bridges at this vital crossing, each with their own to proceed. customs plaza, will provide redundancy critical to • It will create thousands of construction jobs and U.S. and Canadian national and economic security. long-term employment opportunities on both Security screening in Canada will occur at the plaza sides of the border. The project is expected to (not two miles away, as is currently the case); ‘low risk’ create 10,000 to 15,000 direct construction jobs secondary screening on the U.S. side no longer will in Michigan. By providing assured transportation have to take place five miles away from the U.S. plaza. capability going forward, the new bridge will massively enhance the investment climate of North America’s industrial heartland. The ‘heartland’ Trade Corridor • Over 8,000 trucks per day cross the Windsor–Detroit • Canada and Michigan are each other’s best customers; border. According to the Public Border Operators half of everything Michigan sells globally is bought in Association, truck traffic is projected to increase Canada (including 30% of all MI farm products). For 35 128% over the next 30 years. U.S. states, Canada is the principal export market. • Upstream from the new crossing stands the 83-year- • Upwards of half of all Indiana and Ohio exports to old Ambassador Bridge. The value of trade over that Canada cross the Ambassador Bridge. With more bridge (more than $120 billion in 2011) exceeds the than 200,000 jobs in those two states depending on value of all trade between the U.S. and Great Britain. reliable transportation infrastructure at Detroit–Windsor, One-quarter of all U.S.–Canada trade (the world’s each of Indiana’s and Ohio’s House and Senate largest two-way trade relationship) crosses the unanimously passed resolutions calling for the new Ambassador Bridge each year — making it the most bridge to be built. The Michigan, Indiana and Ohio important bridge crossing anywhere in the world. Chambers of Commerce all support the proposed new bridge, as do all of the automobile assemblers, major labor unions and farm organizations. Financing for the New International Trade Crossing • The complete project, including the Canadian and responsibility of the builder. Canada — not Michigan U.S. inspection plazas, the bridge, and the interchange or the USA — will be responsible if toll revenues do with Interstate-75 and the Windsor–Essex Parkway, is not meet projections. estimated to cost between $3.5 and $4 billion. • The U.S. government is expected to cover the full • After a public competition, a private sector firm cost of the U.S. customs plaza. will be selected to build, operate and maintain the • The toll rates will be approved by the International bridge for a concession period long enough to Authority and will be competitive with other allow the company to recoup its (approx.) $1 billion crossings in the region. Michigan and Canada will investment in the project. After the firm is repaid jointly share in the toll revenues once all the project from toll revenues, Canada will recoup the up-to costs incurred by the private builder and Canada $550M in financing it will have provided for have been recouped; a revenue stream of approx. construction of the Interchange on the U.S. side $50M per year will flow to each of Michigan and (no money will flow to Michigan for this purpose; Canada from approx. year 45 for the remaining consequently, Michigan faces no risk and will bear 80 years of the bridge’s projected life. no liability for any costs). Cost overruns are the Next Steps • With the signing of the agreement, Canada and component of the project in the U.S. and the Michigan can now proceed with the next steps of international bridge to be produced in either the the project, including further design work and U.S. or Canada. property acquisition on the U.S. side before • As the new bridge is international, the U.S. construction can begin. Government must issue Presidential and Coast • Buy America policy does not apply to this project. Guard Permits. This agreement requires all iron and steel for any Canada and the U.S. form an integrated North American economy • The Canada–U.S. trade relationship is the world’s supply chains, benefiting firms and consumers on biggest; more than $1.7 billion in goods cross the both sides of the border. The free flow of secured border every day. Each country is the other’s best goods across the border is an essential economic customer — by far! In 2011, the U.S. exported more lifeline for both countries. goods to Canada than it did to China, Japan, the • Measures to enhance U.S. transport efficiency United Kingdom, Brazil and Russia combined. In support the competitiveness of our common North most U.S. states, there are businesses dependent American economic platform. Canada’s investments for their profitability and workers dependent for in transport ‘gateways’ infrastructure offer great their employment on the predictable and efficient benefit to both countries. movement of goods at Detroit–Windsor. Eight million U.S. jobs depend on trade with Canada. • The new bridge at Detroit–Windsor will enable and build the supply chains that link our economies, • The integrated North American transportation system sustaining the employment of millions in the U.S. includes secure ports and railways and efficient and Canada.

Consulate General of Canada 600 Renaissance Center, Suite 1100, Detroit MI, 48243 For more information, contact: George Costaris [email protected] (313) 446-7040