I finally got around last night to watching that Johnny Knoxville-hosted documentary about Detroit. I’d put it off because I’ve been on a bit of Detroit doc overload. The film, a slick infomercial called Detroit Lives, can be viewed here.

Knoxville is best known for his popular stupid-dangerous-absurd stunt/prank MTV show Jackass, which spawned a couple of movies.

(Disclosure: I’m apparently in the minority outside of male college fraternity members, but I’ve always liked Johnny Knoxville because I think he’s a genius for making a lot of money at being stupid. I admire that sort of capitalism. Anyone could have done it, but he monetized gross juvenile stupidity first.)

The three-part documentary is the product of Palladium Boots, which started life as a German tire maker in the ‘20s and later got into footwear by manufacturing boots for the French Foreign Legion. Now, it’s a fashion brand relaunched last year, and part of its shtick is edgy, hip short online films that feature the occasional gratuitous boot shot.

Anyway, what I took away from this: Hipsters and adjunct hipsters believe they will save Detroit with art, individual creativity and hyperlocal collectivist action. That strikes me as a bit short-sighted. What they advocate is just one aspect of a renaissance that will be driven by people creating lots of jobs downtown. The Dan Gilberts, Mike Ilitches, Peter Kamanoses, Roger Penskes — people with a lot of money willing to invest it in businesses in the city, which means jobs. And lots of jobs equals people living and spending money downtown, which rebuilds the tax base.

It's not all billionaires and millionaires. New entrepreneurs willing to invest in businesses with a dozen or 20 or 50 employees ... if you get a hundred of those people, you have something very real started. Those folks are every bit as valuable as the investors employing 1,000 people.

Urban farmers, metal sculptors, painters, poets and musicians are a cool and necessary part of the culture, and it’s great they’re establishing beachheads to retake the city from the brink, but any real healing has to come from people moving back to the city because there are good jobs, schools and reliable city services in addition to vibrant culture. It’s economics, nothing more. Hipsters growing carrots isn’t enough. Detroit isn't an art project, and it's dangerous to dismiss the very real problems with crime and violence in the city. Detroit Lives gave off a slight vibe of that.

As for the video, I’m not offended by it but I’ve seen a growing blowback against it on Facebook. I kind of rolled my eyes at talking heads bitching about Detroit ruin porn when the documentary is basically just that: upbeat ruin porn (along with the prerequisite cursory examination of the city’s fabled music scene and lots of driving around in an open-top Cadillac). They visit the various abandoned buildings that are ubiquitous to such documentaries: the Packard plant, Fisher plant, Michigan Central Station, etc. Knoxville spends much of the documentary being surprised by Detroit.

The difference here is that it’s a boot commercial, even if a subtle one, and it presents the city in a more positive light compared to the end-of-civilization nihilism of a lot of the other look-at-Detroit stuff, especially Julien Temple’s gruesome recent BBC special Requiem For Detroit. Tone and outlook make a difference, but it’s still ruin porn. That said, it’s much easier to digest, at least for me as a city resident, when it’s not an apocalyptic indictment of Western civilization.

So, watch and feel free to leave me some comments here with your thoughts on it.

Before I forget (if I’m even allowed to forget): I noticed in Tuesday’s Free Press that the newspaper put three reporters on yet another story about Calvin Johnson’s non-touchdown catch on Sunday … 48 hours after it happened. The Freep must assume the zeitgeist among its readers is a lingering angry obsession about the catch and the rule that was correctly enforced that said it wasn’t a touchdown.

Perhaps the newspaper is right (I'm not a Lions fan, so I don't know). Still, it may be a stupid rule, but it remains the correct one, even if the rule is an example of the NFL’s slavish, Stalinist devotion to petty bureaucracy on the field. And no matter how much Mitch Albom disagrees with the rule, the call on the field isn’t going to be changed. Time to move on.

Two things that should be of greater concern: The Detroit Lions managed to rush for just 20 yards against Chicago, and franchise quarterback Matthew Stafford’s shoulder was turned to gristle because the team failed to protect him. If they can’t protect him, and can’t reduce pressure on him by effectively running the ball, Stafford’s career may be a short one.

Word is Stafford has a second-degree separation in his throwing shoulder — a key part of him that prompted the Lions to lavish him a contract that could pay him as much as $78 million. That should could be the difference between winning three or four games and seven or eight games.

The team says he doesn’t need surgery, but Stafford is reportedly meeting this week with renowned sports surgeon Dr. James Andrews. You don’t visit a dentist if you don’t need your teeth worked on, right? Andrews may yet say surgery isn’t required, but the team’s pronouncement seems premature if the quarterback is undergoing tests with Andrews. Stay tuned.

Two quick items:

~ The Detroit Tigers have unveiled their 2011 schedule here.

~ Forgive me and please indulge my self-absorbed Andy Rooney-style curmudgeonly rant, but have the Sunday comics always been this grindingly unfunny? Other than Dilbert and occasionally the Lockhorns, the comics drive me every weekend into a fit of anger. Everyone has different tastes, but come ON. This stuff is either lame, senseless or ancient (and I'm talking to you, Sally Forth, Judge Parker and Prince Valient). Perhaps I was spoiled growing up with Bloom County, The Far Side, Herman and Calvin & Hobbes. Sometimes I'll read Doonsbury if Uncle Duke is in it, but otherwise it's tiresomely preachy.

Somewhere during the hot, desperate summer of 1968, a street parade of protesters and other hardcore Left-wing activists apparently got lost in some sort of space-time vortex.

The colorful cavalcade of about 2,000 people turned up yesterday on Woodward Avenue, every bit as hairy, smelly, and sanctimonious (and loudly claiming victimization) as participants did 42 summers ago. Drums were banged, slogans chanted, horns tooted, banners unfurled … it could have been a Left-wing World Cup match … can you play “The Internationale” and “Beasts of England” on the vuvuzela?

Instead of Vietnam, LBJ and Tricky Dick, 2010’s U.S. Social Forum opening parade Tuesday afternoon represented a dizzying array of causes, and every imaginable grievance demanding a government solution, or at least someone else’s money to pay for rights/handouts/etc. Participants wanted their free education, legal pot, free this-and-that, and no thought to who will pay for it, except the ill-defined “rich” and “evil corporations.”

Haircuts, razors and deodorant were not in demand. Yes, that makes me sound like a calcified relic of the 1960's Establishment, but it’s a valid point: Do you have to be unkempt and reeking of body odor to make a political point? At one point, fellow reporter Nate Skid and I found ourselves marching in the middle of the parade and the smell of human sweat was overpowering.

Some Secret or Mitchum would have gone a long way Tuesday because the sun was pounding mercilessly by the time the parade sputtered into life around 3 p.m. I was unintentionally dressed as a cross between Jungle Jack Hannah and Indiana Jones, sweating profusely, but I thought it best to be prepared for whatever action might go down. My preparations, besides deodorant, included packing a copy of Orwell’s Animal Farm (as a sort of good-luck talisman) and a surplus Israeli gas mask. I’ve been gassed on several occasions in my career, and wasn’t interested in spending Tuesday evening with my face underneath a faucet because it felt like wasabi had been smeared on my eyeballs and my lungs filled with kerosene-soaked fiber glass.

The USSF parade organizers were prepared for trouble, too. They contracted Detroit-based security firm Threat Management to provide about 20 unarmed bodyguards dressed in combat boots, gray urban camouflage and black tactical web gear to march alongside the parade. This is atop the hundred, or so, Detroit cops stationed at each intersection and accompanying the parade.

The guys from Threat Management (who would have been called jackbooted thugs if they were in the employ of the Tea Party) declined to say how much they were paid to act as a menacing personal army for the USSF. They did say their job was to protect the marchers from “purse snatchers” and any violence that might erupt from Right-wing counter-demonstrators, which amounted to a single middle-aged man dressed up in colonial Tea Party gear and handing out pamphlets.

Apparently, there was little confidence Detroit’s finest could protect USSF marchers from local thieves, evil-doers and panhandling hobos. Or maybe they fear Chief Warren Evans and Mayor Dave Bing harbor a latent Richard J. Daley streak and could turn the cops loose on the neo-Yippie forum with tear gas and riot sticks?

The Leftist National Lawyer’s Guild had “legal observers” circulating during the parade, presumably to catalogue any infringement of marcher’s rights, or something.

In any case, it’s been pointed out that the forum is bringing people into the city along with their wallets. In other words, the self-avowed anti-capitalists would be engaging in some much-needed capitalism. And the markers and paint and white cardboard signs used for slogans, along with the clothing, bullhorns, drums and other gear used during the parade all are produced by corporations. Oh, and USSF is charging the homeless $10 to participate in its actual sessions, and daily entry fees rise with economic stature.

But that’s not nice to point out. Any criticism of the USSF, of course, immediately attracts accusations that you’re a closed-minded reactionary fascist McCarthyite who hates poor people and minorities, and is interested only in profit at the expense of Mother Earth, blah, blah, blah. The USSF’s claims of tolerance and open arms quickly crumbles into fraudulence when supporters label all criticism as ignorant racist heresy.

Here’s what the Marxist-Leninsit World Worker’s Party (which has a temporary bookstore set up at the forum, engaging in a bit of capitalism itself) has to say about its views for the USSF: “Being against capitalism is a good start. But let’s take it further. We need to abolish capitalism and replace it with socialism, a system where all of society is planned and organized to meet human needs and the needs of the earth instead of profits for a few. Socialism means the right to a job at a living wage, free education and health care, housing for all and much more. It means the development of each person to their full potential, and it means taking care of our planet. Cuba, with very few resources, has shown the world that socialism is possible with a strong leadership and the will of the people. Or you support the Palestinian struggle and demand no more U.S. funding of apartheid Israel. Or you’re tired of all the lies directed against Iran and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.”

Support for the brutal, bloodthirsty authoritarian regimes in Cuba, Gaza and North Korea, along with gross anti-capitalism … this is why it’s hard for many people (especially the business community) to take the USSF seriously and why any useful discussion is lost in the sound and fury of the radicals. There are plenty of non-communists and non-anarchists at the forum, but the fringe is there in force and aggressively flying its freak flags. There is absolutely no reason to take the USSF seriously based on all I’ve seen, and its own anti-business rhetoric.

These snippets are from a devastating anonymous commentary I saw that sums up the glaring criticisms of both the USSF and its ideological mirror-opposite, the Tea Party:

~ “You know how you shield your movement from being defined by an alleged ‘minority of ultra-extremists?’ You purge the ultra-extremists. The UAW was a potent force after WWII because Walter Reuther purged the Stalinists. The Goldwater/Reagan conservative movement was viable because Buckley purged the John Birch Society. This isn’t that difficult to understand. So why won’t the Social Forum or Tea Party purge the lunatics? Because no one likes talking to an empty room.”

~ “To think either ‘movement’ represents a critical mass capable of forcing constructive change is to confess one’s ignorance. The Social Forum-ites high water mark was 1948 (before most were born), when Henry Wallace won 6% of the vote. And the Tea Party looks like it will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory this fall.”

~ “... we should get serious about fixing those problems. But we can’t get serious about that while giving credence to idiots who want to debate the merits of Marx v. Keynes or that Senator Robert Bennett (R-UT) is some kind of evil socialist.”

The writer, who I know to be a highly intelligent centrist, summed up the USSF as “a rabble of self-righteous malcontents who can’t cross the street without first holding a soviet to establish class conscious protocols for street crossing.”

For evidence of that last point, one can’t even relieve one’s self at the event without a mind-numbing flurry of feel-good legislated nonsense from the USSF organizers. This is copied directly from the forum’s own online literature: “The US Social Forum is a space where we put into practice our vision for a world that respects everyone’s human dignity. In solidarity with our trans participants (including- transgender, transsexual, genderqueer and other gender non-conforming people), we have designated a number of all gender restrooms in Cobo Hall and Tent City. There will be signs for all gender restrooms in English, Spanish and Braille. Many transgender and gender non-conforming people have been harassed, beaten, ridiculed, and even arrested in both men and women's restrooms. The National Planning Committee (NPC) has adopted a policy to stand in opposition to the above acts and in solidarity with the trans and gender non-conforming community.”

Media coverage of Tuesday’s parade was slim. The Detroit News and the Free Press published short stories and a few photos of the wilder participants. The alternative media gave it some attentions, especially the liberal Huffington Post online, but that’s about it.

The Ruckus Society, which trains, plans and executes protest actions, is involved at a DTE protest scheduled for 3 p.m. today. I think it’s near Cobo or Hart Plaza, but I’m not sure because the USSF website (link) is a bit goofy.

UPDATE: Two things I forgot to mention ... Meagan Pitts, former deputy press secretary to Dave Bing, has been hired to handle some communications work for USSF. And the other thing ... no one really watched this parade. It was at 3 p.m. on a Tuesday. Other than cars passing in the north-bound lanes, and people in their offices along the route, there were no spectators to speak of. Not much PR and poor timing as much of lack of public solidarity, I suspect.

Below are some photos Nate Skid shot during the parade:



Me walking toward the head of the parade.


He was warning that BP and Goldman Sachs were coming. Seriously.


Me talking to some of USSF's hired personal army.


The black flag of the anarchists.


The front of the parade. Unsure what the flags represent.


The giant planet Earth had to race to catch up to the rest of the parade.


The parade extended several blocks after about a half hour of its start.

The rain that moved in late Monday likely has had some effect on Movement’s critical ticket sales, but the final official numbers won’t be available until tomorrow. Weather makes or breaks the event financially because ticket sales account for 70 percent of its revenue.

The first two days trended well at the gate, organizers said, and sunshine (or at least no rain) for part of Monday may have been enough to push the festival’s attendance past last year’s 83,000.

Attendance Saturday was 35,335 and attendance for Sunday was 31,745. That’s 67,080, or about 16,000 shy of last year’s mark The weekend totals so far do not include VIP entry.

Monday’s crowd was noticeably thinner than Saturday’s. The weather didn’t help, and it’s technically a school night. I’m assuming the multicolored, spaced-out crowd of ravers goes to school and work, but it’s very possible this happy-weird mob simply goes into hibernation until next Memorial Day weekend.

I didn’t get to Hart Plaza on Sunday. I meant to, really, but I stayed up late Saturday watching Sam Peckinpah’s classic “Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia” on cable and woke up Sunday morning reeking of sun screen and sweat. Yech. Later in the day, I attended an unofficial Memorial Day weekend wake for Gary Coleman, Dennis Hopper and Dontrelle Willis (see below). The host irresponsibly overserved her guests, all too polite to refuse her misguided generosity.

Taking a break was good, however. There’s only so much ambient stimulation one’s senses can reasonably absorb, from the constant aural pounding of the synthetic beats to the visual overload of an endless parade of girls wearing neon furry leggings like hippie half-Wookies. By today, I had recovered on a number of fronts.

As I write this, I’m soaked to the skin. The rain began late in the afternoon and parked itself over Hart Plaza. Much of tonight’s crowd sought shelter in tents and inside the cavernous maze of concrete tunnels underneath the riverfront venue. This was my first time in the plaza, and it’s pretty neat. Excellent location for such events.

It rained at Woodstock, too. Probably not as many glow sticks and pacifiers at Woodstock, however. The stench of marijuana, however, was probably the same. I noticed it in the media lounge, too. And nasty clove cigarette reek.

The police presence at Movement wasn’t oppressive. It was a pleasant contrast to Boat Night in Port Huron, the downtown party on the eve of the annual sailboat race to Mackinac Island. I was part of that for years. Much of the fun was sapped from that night because the reactionary city fathers turned the little city’s downtown into an Orwellian police state, and the crowds – and the money brought into town by them – have dwindled alarmingly in recent years. Port Huron could take a lesson from Detroit.

I chatted briefly this afternoon with Movement organizer Jason Huvaere, who needs to take in about $1 million in ticket, food/beverage and sponsorship sales to pay for the event. He was optimistic and was pleased that the festival is growing internationally – from the global acts booked to those attending from overseas to foreign media coverage.

Beers and mixed drinks were $8. With some Red Bull -- a Movement primary sponsor -- the same drinks were $10. And there were a lot of empty beer and Red Bull cans strewn about. Bottled water was $3.

I'm told Kid Rock, whose Made In Detroit clothing line was prominent at the festival, showed up late Saturday with some of the Red Wings. Or maybe with some of the Detroit Tigers. Maybe both, I don't remember. I didn't spot any celebrities. I did see a guy trying to write on a chalked-up wall with a fly swatter. Twice.

Movement was heavily promoting its free iPhone app that basically users all the festival information they might need on their phone. I suppose it's natural that a techno music event should embrace technology advancements so readily. Sadly, I can't afford a smart phone, so I can't review the app for you. I did peek over a few shoulders and saw people using it.

GOODBYE, D TRAIN: In news totally unrelated to Movement, and probably of completely non-interest to those in Hart Plaza, the Detroit Tigers on Saturday effectively fired pitcher Dontrelle Willis.

This sort of makes me look foolish (or more foolish than usual) because on May 20 I wrote that the franchise was finally getting better production out of Willis. Which was true. But apparently the team believes it can get even more production out of pitcher Max Scherzer – who reinforced that faith Sunday with an improbable 14 strikeouts after being in the minors since his last start on May 14.

Detroit gave Willis a three-year, $29 million contract extension as part of the December 2007 trade that brought him and first-baseman Miguel Cabrera to town. I always thought of Willis’ salary as a sort of tax required for Cabrera’s big bat. Now, the Tigers’ front office has determined that it has reached its financial tolerance for Willis’ contract versus his production.

Basically, Willis was too much of an enigma when he took the mound because his mental issues affected his pitching ability. He either mowed down opposing batters, or loaded the bases like he was filling lifeboats. A team with post-season aspirations can’t afford that kind of wild uncertainty, especially when the rest of the starting pitchers are acting loopy, too.

For $29 million, Detroit got two victories from Willis. That’s $14.5 million per W. Even the deep-pockets of owner Mike Ilitch aren’t bottomless, and I would guess that he green-lighted the Willis move ... or at least was apprised of it.

Ilitch will be on the hook for the remainder of Willis’ $12 million salary this season. Reportedly about $8 million is left on the deal. Detroit is also paying almost all of pitcher Nate Robertson’s $9.6 million salary this year after his trade to the Florida Marlins. By season’s end, Detroit will have paid nearly $20 million for two pitchers to pitch elsewhere (assuming Willis gets traded or picked up after his pending release; and I’m sure he will). That dwarfs the $13.6 million the team paid to Gary Sheffield last season after he was released prior to Opening Day.

So we’re looking at nearly $34 million to three players in two seasons who contributed almost zero to the team in that time. The Pittsburgh Pirates’ entire player payroll this season is $34.9 million. If it’s addition by subtraction, the calculus is mighty expensive.

Up next: I’ll have the final Movement attendance numbers some time Tuesday.

Night has fallen on Hart Plaza, but the rhythmic pumping of the beat remains vibrant. So does good ol’ American capitalism.

You can’t escape the trappings of our free-market system as you arrive at Movement: The fences along Jefferson Avenue are festooned with scores of sponsor banners, the money from which helps make the festival possible.

Inside, countless booths and tents are home to vendors of every stripe: cigarette and candy sellers, clothing companies, musical equipment manufacturers and Ford Motor Co. Detroit’s two other automakers are present only in permanent manifestations the will remain long after the music has faded - the Horace Dodge fountain and General Motors’ Renaissance Center headquarters that looms over the plaza. Ford, however, rules Movement.

Southfield-based Med Grow Cannabis College, the school for medical marijuana, had a booth and was attracting interest. Founder Nick Tennant (a Crain’s 20 In Their 20s honoree this year) had other obligations that kept him away today, so I wasn’t able to chat with him. The Specs Howard broadcast school was also had a booth, trying to attract potential new students. Specs volunteers handed our Mardi Gras-style beads, some of which are in my pocket.

Dollars were changing hands rapidly across the plaza Saturday afternoon. The heat and sunshine fueled plenty of beverage purchases. So did the rampant use of thirst-creating Ecstasy that was evident among some of the festival goers.

I’d never attended Movement or its previous incarnations before today, but based on the wild tales told by friends, I figured some wooly neon geek would try to sell me acid within minutes of arriving. Didn’t happen. My H.R. “Bob” Haldeman buzz cut may have given off a narc vibe. Or maybe I just exude a reactionary Establishment persona, or something.

The Hotel Pontchartrain used to be ground zero for some of the festival’s black market activity, but it sits vacant now across the street. Several Movement veterans bemoaned the loss of the hotel and its role in the event.

Electronic music – I can’t distinguish the differences among techno, house, electronica, trip-hop, industrial, ambient, trance and breakbeat if my life depended on it – isn’t my thing. Before taking the People Mover to Hart Plaza, I girded myself with some Davie Bowie and some Doors. Once there, it pretty much sounded like the same digital beat over and over. Perhaps I’m a musical Luddite. I don’t dislike it, and some of it is catchy enough that you find yourself moving to it, but I’m not rushing out to buy any albums. I also didn’t see any for sale today. Odd.

And yes, lots of people danced in rhythmic, sometimes manic styles, seemingly lost in some private reverie as they enjoyed whatever drug-fueled symphony of sound and lights unfolded in their heads. Me, I raided the private air-conditioned VIP hospitality area – which my credentials may or may not have entitled me to, but no one asked – and languidly observed the crowds from the comfort of a pleather couch. Megastar DJ Richie Hawtin nodded at me from his perch nearby as he tried to drink a screwdriver while sycophants pestered him. I left him alone.

The atmosphere inside Hart Plaza was pleasant enough. The scene was a nightmare of Day-Glo-meets-Tom Wolfe’s acid tests. The fashion was Hot Topic/Urban Outfitters/American Apparel and whatever could be scrounged from the thrift store, Salvation Army or Dumpster. This was the Mount Suribachi for the techno crowd to raise its freak flag. The human peacocks were strutting their colors, gloriously unworried about things like dignity.

The crowd was overwhelmingly young, but there was a cadre of veteran graybeards holding their own. The vibe-impression I got was that it’s a blend of the 21st century grandchildren of Woodstock hippies, jaded Euro-trash hipsters, a re-imagining of the Troubadour period over top the decadence of Weimar Germany. In other words, great fun.

But fun isn’t cheap. The food and beverage prices are ballpark rates. The best investment, however, may be a couple of bucks for some earplugs. And those are for sale, too.

Up next: I’ll wander back over to Hart Plaza tomorrow afternoon to see if I can get some early attendance numbers and other tidbits.

If you look around Hart Plaza today, understand that this is Jason Huvaere’s million-dollar baby.

Literally.

Huvaere – it’s pronounced  Who-Var – chatted with me Friday afternoon, and he told be Movement costs about $1 million to stage.

Huvaere is president and co-founder of Ferndale-based Paxahau Promotions Group L.L.C., the event production company he launched several years ago with childhood friends. The organization took over the electronic music festival in time to rescue it from an uncertain fate before the 2006 show.

The biggest X-factor? Weather. If it’s anything less than nice out – always a distinct possibility because of Michigan’s traditionally fickle Memorial Day weekend weather – the three-day event will end up in the red.

The Weather Gods are cooperating this weekend. It’s clear skies with a rising mercury.

Not an issue? Cooperation from the city. Huvaere said Kilpatrick, Cockrel and Bing administrations each have been helpful and contributed to its success.

So what does it take to keep Movement in the black, or at least break even? Three things, Huvaere says: Sponsorships, tickets and food/beverage sales. And Paxahau needs all three things to come through because the organization doesn’t scrimp.

“We spend almost irresponsibly on talent and production because we have such a passion for doing it right and raising the bar,” he said.

Corporation/media sponsorships account for about 20 percent of Movement’s revenue and food (handled by Stewart Davidson of Troy-based Slendid Plates) is 10 percent. The remaining 70 percent of revenue comes from ticket sales, Huvaere said.

If there’s any money left after expenses, it’s banked to pay for next year’s Movement, he said: “If we end up in the black, the money gets rolled back into the entire campaign.”

Maintaining cash flow is Movement’s biggest financial obstacle, Huvaere said. The festival has 200 to 250 paid staff bolstered by a legion of volunteers.

“Our goal has never been for a certain or amount. Our goal is to maintain direction.
That is when we’re doing our job,” he said. “This whole thing is about Detroit, about music. This thing owns us. We don’t own it.”

And there’s no rest for the weary. Huvaere and his crew will begin tearing the event down on Tuesday, then he’s off to the Mackinac Policy Conference on Wednesday. Then there’s another Paxahau event Friday. He won’t get a break until the end of the first week of July. Then just briefly.

“It takes the entire month of June to close it out, to pay bills,” he said. “We work on the event all year.”

Corporate America has taken notice of the event, which used to have more than a million attendees before fiscal problems led to admission costs (about 83,000 tickets were sold last year). Microsoft is rolling out its new Kin smart phone during Movement, and Ford is making the event one of the early public introductions of its new Fiesta. Music business companies Allen & Heath and Livio Radio also are launching products during Movement.

“This is a huge, significant statement about the value of the festival and the city,” Huvaere said.

The appreciation from fans, attention within the music industry and increasing corporate sponsorship make the difficult birth of each Movement worthwhile. The positive attention for Detroit helps, too, Huvaere said. “It’s almost like a social orgasm,” he said. “I love watching the stages when they’re all lit up. There’s nothing quite like it.”

Up next: I’m off to Hart Plaza to check out the sights, sounds, colors and commerce. I’ll be posting again later this afternoon. If I’m not shell-shocked from glowsticks, Vitamin Water and pulsing electronic beats. So it begins ...

It's 7:15 a.m. What better time to get our coverage started? This will be brief because I have to grab a shower and then treat myself to a gargantuan Saturday morning breakfast at Louie's -- you need to store up a lot of energy to properly cover something like this.

A quick shout-out for Louie's, which is along the edge of Eastern Market on Mack Avenue. If you've not eaten there, you must -- good food and portions, decent prices and Detroit's movers/shakers can sometimes be spotted there. The place is run almost entirely by Albanians (a family, I'm sure), so keep that in mind if you've got any of those long-simmering Balkan rivalry issues.

But that's the first of many digressions today. When I awoke this morning, there was an e-mail waiting for me from ex-Kwame Kilpatrick spokesman James Canning, who is handling the media relations for Movement via his PR agency, Canning Communications. I had asked him how many members of the media are credentialed for the event.

"We had about 375 requests for credentials. Several organizations, both those who were granted and those who were denied, made requests for multiple people. We ended up credentialing almost 240," he wrote.
 
"We have about another 60 who receive media credentials because they require stage access, people like an artists personal photographer/videographer, volunteer photogs, etc."

He sent me an Excel spreadsheet listing the news outlets signed up to cover Movement: Rolling Stone magazine, the New York Times, BBC, a Russian TV station and Playboy.com are among the big names.

Just about every local outlet, and everything that fancies itself a local outlet for news and/or purveyor of local cultural information (I'm talking to *you*, DBusiness. Not really, I'm just kidding. Or maybe not.) is signed up to cover the festival.

There were several news organizations listed with local connections I've never heard of: Detroit Girls About Town, Detroit Live magazine, Tell Us USA News Network, ClearMag.com and Metrotimes. I'm 96 percent kidding on that last one.

The Free Press and The Detroit News both have 11 credentials each. I imagine a good portion of those are photo and video people, because Movement lends itself to pictures and sound more than words (pity me, but I am bringing a photographer).

So you have plenty of options for coverage of this weekend's orgy of dance music. Obviously you should start here, but be sure to check out all the media outlets.

I'll be curious to see if the reporting sticks to the music festival, or if it will expand into what's become something of a lazy industry for reporters: Doing a piece on apocalyptic Detroit, its urban ruins, blight, crime, corruption and the rest. Will they be able to avoid the apparently powerful siren song of the Packard Plant and Michigan Central Depot ruins? Because no other visiting journalists have managed to resist. "Hey reporter! Come photograph us! We personify the city's problems! Do it! It'll be a unique statement on urban decline! No one else has done this, we swear!"

That's a partial digression.

Next up, after breakfast: A conversation with Movement producer Jason Huvaere about the finances of the event.

The sound, lights and colors of Detroit electronic dance music festival will dominate this weekend's local news coverage.

I'll be covering the event, too, but from a different perspective: Money. Specifically, the sponsorship and commerce that form a not-so-subtle subtext of Movement. It takes money, in the form of sponsorships and ticket sales, to make this event work -- and it's become one of the world's leading electronic music gatherings.

And sponsors such as Kid Rock's Made In Detroit clothing label are using Movement as a sales platform. Ford has signed on as the presenting sponsor, to tout the Fiesta. It's a symbiotic relationship, one often ignored or missed amid the pulse of lights and beats (and empty water bottles).

So check back here this weekend to see what I come up with. It should be interesting.

An infrastructure investment analyst is sounding warnings about the border traffic estimates being used to justify the proposed $5.3 billion Detroit River International Crossing, and believes the bridge will need taxpayer subsidies to be built.

The study, mandated last year by the Michigan Legislature, was conducted for the state by Columbia, S.C.-based engineering and planning firm Wilbur Smith Associates, which has an office in Lansing.

It estimates that border traffic locally will grow significantly in the next decade, especially commercial trucks. It’s currently at 1987 levels, with increases shown this year, but remains at half of its peak level set in 1999.

“The infrastructure investment community considers the Wilbur Smith study wildly optimistic. There’s not a lot of confidence in the traffic demand study,” said Brian Chase, an investment analyst on large infrastructure projects for the Washington D.C.-based International Finance Corp., part of the World Bank Group.

Chase was formerly a financial/legal analyst with Los Angeles-based Nossaman L.L.P. which specializes in toll road issues, and later was with Washington D.C.-based private equity firm Carlyle Group.

Danielle Gadow, director of corporate communications for Wilbur Smith Associates, said the company is contractually obligated to defer all comment to the Michigan Department of Transportation.

Kirk Steudle, MDOT’s director, said the agency’s plan is to listen to the private sector: If the bidders believe the traffic estimate is flawed and the project isn’t doable, then there won’t be interest. He also said MDOT will keep the revenue estimates secret until after the final bid process so that the bids remain competitive. That includes keeping the revenue estimate, and how much the bridge needs to generate, secret from lawmakers for now.

Toll industry analysts have estimated that a typical 30-year construction financing arrangement, along with yearly operational costs, would mean about $120 million in annual bridge debt — probably not sustainable under the traffic projections in the study.

MDOT says that the financing will be complex and that it’s not yet known how it will be put together, so using back-of-the-envelope estimates is risky.

The nearby presence of the competing Ambassador Bridge means tolls could be much more expensive than what the border currently has — or DRIC would require a taxpayer subsidy to avoid default.

The privately owned Ambassador Bridge is believed to take in about $60 million annually in revenue, but has declined to discuss its finances. It could be as high as $100 million annually.

Skepticism about the study makes DRIC nearly impossible to finance based solely on tolls, Chase said.

“I can’t think of a single financial investor that would take the (traffic) demand risk,” he said. (Reference and link here to book story)

Even with Canada’s offer to pay up to $550 million of the state’s DRIC costs not covered by federal or private financing (money that Michigan requested), there’s still going to be public cost on this side of the border, Chase said.

“There will be some sort of U.S. taxpayer subsidy, either at the national, state or local level,” he said. “I think it’s reckless to say the project will not require some sort of U.S. taxpayer subsidy. If the project’s being sold on that basis, it’s problematic.”

No U.S. federal funding has been committed to the project, which has a tentative 2016 opening date. The Federal Highway Administration, a DRIC partner, declined comment. Ray LaHood, the U.S. transportation secretary, also declined to comment. (UPDATE: LaHood told reporters in Washington today that he supports a second span over the Detroit River, The Detroit News reported)

Political, civil and business community backers of the joint U.S.-Canadian crossing, which has a $2.1 billion estimated price for its bridge and $5.3 billion cost overall, have said that tolls will repay the construction debt and operational costs. The majority of civil engineering/construction firms and financial agencies that have expressed initial interest in DRIC say they have doubts about tolls and traffic, and prefer guaranteed government payments instead, called availability payments.

Steudle said that the concession agreement will include a default clause that prevents the state from being responsible for and deficit or default. However, he also said the agency hasn’t ruled out the availability payment subsidies and that the final form of the concession is far from being written. Two of the interest bidders on the project said tolls could finance DRIC, and Steudle believes that is enough to get other companies to

The Michigan Legislature, which includes a bloc of DRIC opponents, is scheduled to vote by June 1 on MDOT’s continued financial participation in the project. The public-private partnership enabling legislation that DRIC advocates have guided through the Legislature is considered the state’s yes/no vote on the project. That vote could come this week, after being delayed last week — reportedly out of fear that there are not enough votes in favor of it.

The Legislature did not ask for a revenue study, just an investment grade traffic study. That was the result of a compromise crafted by pro- and anti-DRIC lawmakers last year to get the current MDOT budget approved.

Traffic estimates are notoriously difficult to make accurately, and projects have suffered because of the economic downtown in recent years.

The I-185 public-private toll road project in South Carolina known as the Southern Connector is reportedly $8 million behind in its payments because traffic failed to meet projections made by Wilbur Smith Associates, Chase said.

“The private investors lost most of their investment in the project,” Chase said. “That’s a relevant cautionary tale (for investors) when they think of DRIC.”

A July 2008 report by the Center for Transportation Research at The University of Texas at Austin on behalf of the Texas Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration, says the same thing: A majority of toll-road projects overestimated traffic levels in the first five years by at least 20 percent to 30 percent.

Chase believes the recession is actually what’s driving DRIC: Instead of meeting a current traffic demand need, the project is more about future economic development for the struggling region, he said.

“This is what’s called a ‘field of dreams’ project. The hope is if you build it, the traffic will come.”

So if the traffic doesn’t meet projections, who left paying the deficit?

If the bridge is a straight toll concession, the private partner would be responsible. Under an availability payment arrangement, it’s the public. But as MDOT has promised, the public will be off the hook — if that’s how the concession is worded.

Canada’s Minster of Transport John Baird refused to say if that nation will assume the responsibility for any debt obligation not covered by tolls.

Gov. Jennifer Granholm, through her press secretary, deferred comment to MDOT. She spoke at an April 29 press conference for DRIC supporters at which a factsheet was given out that said “Taxes will not be used to build a new publicly owned bridge.”

DRIC’s backers say the project is needed to protect and bolster trade in the region, and to create jobs. The Detroit-Windsor border, which includes the bridge, a tunnel and ferries, is the busiest in North America and carries a quarter of all U.S. trade with Canada, estimated at about $130 billion.

Granholm has said it will create 10,000 construction jobs and protect or create another 25,000 jobs. It’s predicted to process 34 percent of all the border traffic between Detroit and Port Huron by 2035, including new traffic and that which is siphons from other crossings.

The 20,000-member Detroit Regional Chamber strongly backs DRIC, and likely would support the project even if it requires taxpayer subsidies.

“I can’t say that we wouldn’t support it,” said Sarah Hubbard, the chamber’s vice president of government relations.

The chamber has typically supported other infrastructure that isn’t paid for by tolls or user fees, she said, and cautioned that it’s still very early in the DRIC process.

“They are preliminary proposals. When they get serious, they’ll get much more comprehensive,” she said Sarah Hubbard. “There’s a long way to go related to this discussion.”

If DRIC ends up an availability toll concession — as nine of the 11 private-sector firms submitting interest bids to MDOT suggest it should be — what specifically does that mean?

Peter Samuel, editor of Maryland-based toll industry newsletter and website Toll Road News, said availability payments are usually entered into when private sector companies won’t bear the risk because they don’t think the toll revenues will cover their costs.

“The public sector takes all the revenue risk in this situation. Tolls are there to help the public partners make those availability payments but they have to make up the difference from other funds (taxes, fees, budgetary appropriations),” he said. “The public sector partners are entitled to the toll revenues under these arrangements but the private sector is entitled to a contracted monthly, quarterly or annual fee regardless of tolls and traffic.”

Availability payment concessions are more common in Canada, but they’re starting to be used in the United States for large infrastructure projects, such as the $1 billion Port of Miami Tunnel being built by DRIC bidder Bouygues Travaux.

The $1.6 billion Windsor-Essex Parkway, which is part of the DRIC infrastructure, is expected to be built by Canada under an availability payment concession. Three consortiums of private-sector firms are the finalists to build the road, and the winning bid will be announced later this year by Ontario’s Ministry of Transportation.

All three consortiums include companies that responded to MDOT’s DRIC interest bid solicitation.

The private-sector companies interested in building a new Detroit River crossing are divided in their belief if toll revenue can cover the project’s cost.

Some say tolls will be enough, but most prefer direct payments from the government (or government-run bridge authority) instead. That eliminates or significantly reduces private-sector risk if the tolls aren't enough to pay the bridge -- potentially leaving Michigan taxpayers (or Canadian taxpayers, or both) on the hook if a subsidy is needed.

The Michigan and Canadian government backers of the proposed Detroit River International Crossing project have said since its inception that toll revenue would recoup construction financing costs, which would be assumed by private companies in a joint public-private arrangement to build and operate the span.

The bridge has an estimated $2.1 billion cost as part of the wider $5.3 billion project. Michigan is close to approving the public-private partnership (P3) legislation that’s the preferred route to creating the bridge.

However, several of the firms that responded to an MDOT request for interest bids in January warn that toll revenue could be a non-starter. (Link)

“In the current economic environment, we believe that to develop a complex project under a public-private partnership structure, a business model with availability payments is the best solution if not the unique one,” wrote Paris-based mega-civil engineering firm Bouygues Travaux Publics S.A. in its bid.

Bouygues Travaux has built major transit infrastructure worldwide, including the tunnel that spans the English Channel.

A P3 arrangement will sometimes use what’s called an “availability payment” in which the concessionaire gets payments from the government in lieu of the toll money. Availability payments are uncoupled from demand, such as in cases where there is no user fee, or revenue from tolls is expected to be insufficient.

MDOT nor its DRIC partners (Ontario's Ministry of Transport and Transport Canada, and the U.S. Federal Highway Administration) haven't said if availability payments would be acceptable.

Critics, including some in the toll industry, say the traffic estimates used to justify the DRIC bridge are overly optimistic, increasing both public financial risk on the project and uneasiness by lenders in financing a toll-drive project.

A July 2008 report by the Center for Transportation Research at The University of Texas at Austin on behalf of the Texas Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration, says the same thing: A majority of toll-road projects overestimated traffic levels in the first five years by at least 20 percent to 30 percent.

One of the mega civil infrastructure firms officially interested in DRIC, Australia’s Macquarie, saw the $843 million South Bay Expressway it opened in 2007 as a part of a public-private partnership in San Diego file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection because traffic estimates failed to meet reality.

MDOT, which previously released DRIC traffic estimates, on Friday said a DRIC toll revenue study is still ongoing.

Bouygues Travaux also warned that lenders are wary of toll-driven projects.

“Traffic risk deals have underperformed and financial markets may not show sufficient appetite to finance this project if senior lenders have to take patronage risks,” the firm wrote. “Traffic deals with patronage risk are more expensive and may even be non-financable.

The company, which would want a 10-percent equity stake in the bridge, said an alternative to availability payments would be a hybrid in which the governments would provide minimum traffic guarantees — which translate in a subsidy — that would take traffic revenue risk off lenders.

Madrid-based Acciona S.A., which did a P3 project for a highway outside Montreal, is another global civil infrastructure firm that expressed its preference to availability payments, rather than a direct toll concession, in its interest bid with MDOT.

The company wrote: “Availability payments (are) the best option to achieve best value for money, and all or at least the vast majority of the payment should be availability-based. Certainty on the revenue stream will be essential to finance the project. This type of P3 structure transfers the risks of designing, building, financing and operating/maintaining a project to the private partner. Risk of volume and vehicle traffic remains in hands of public sector that is better positioned to assume the risk related to the revenues generated from the users.”

Acciona offered the alternative of shadow tolls, which payments made by government (or, in this case, the public bridge authority) to the private sector operator based on the number of vehicles using the bridge.

The firm said the presence of the Ambassador Bridge and its traffic would make DRIC “difficult to finance.”

Canada’s Scotiabank, which is the financial advisor for the DRIC-related Windsor-Essex Parkway project, noted preference for availability payments in its interest bid to MDOT.

“From the prospective of a lender, credit risk is decreased if remuneration to the private partner comes in the form of an availability payment. There are many reasons for this; however, the most significant is the lack of demand risk,” the bank wrote.

It also warned that toll projections make lenders wary.

“Lower than projected traffic has plagued many user toll-based PPPs around the U.S., and as a result, senior lenders are more restrictive in providing credit to demand based facilities. This issue is particularly relevant for the proposed project considering the current economic climate,” it wrote.

That doesn’t mean tolls can’t work, however.

“This is not to say that the project will not be financeable if it utilizes a demand based payment mechanism, however, any financing will require a great deal of traffic and trade volume due diligence, as well as comfort with the proposed toll setting mechanism on the part of the funders,” the bank wrote.

The bank also noted that lenders will likely want a bigger debt-to-equity ratio if tolls are used as the primary revenue source: “If a demand based payment mechanism is utilized for the project or a portion thereof, a considerably larger amount of equity will be required. A D/E range of roughly 60:40 to 75:25 will likely be required to gain comfort from lenders.”

That’s compared to a 85:15 to 90:10 ratio under an available payment concession, the bank wrote.

Interestingly, Scotiabank was a financial advisor on the now-bankrupt South Bay Expressway. It mentions its involvement in the bid, but the bankruptcy came after its submission — but the revenue troubles have been ongoing.

Some civil engineering-construction firms, such as Montreal-based SNC-Lavalin Inc., prefer toll revenue over availability payments.

“This real toll remuneration method is the most common, currently utilized structure for demand based transportation P3s in North America and globally. This method would benefit the public due to the private partner’s motivation to market and maintain the facility in order to encourage use by traveling motorists or freight haulers as well as avoid any penalty regimes included in the concession agreement for poor operation and maintenance,” SNC-Lavalin wrote in its bid.

SNC-Lavalin built the Canada Line Rapid Transit system in Vancouver.

Ottawa-based law firm Gowling Lafleur Henderson L.L.P., which is interested in providing legal guidance to the project, also expressed concerns about availability payments to finance the bridge — including higher tolls.

“It would shorten the amortization of the bridge to the available term of financing, which would be about 35-40 years with an amortizing bond. This would in turn result in tolls that would be higher than economically required. By assuming traffic risk, the sponsors would be taking on a very significant financial risk, as well as the political risk associated with the setting of tolls,” the firm wrote.

Cintra Infraestructuras S.A.U. from Madrid, Spain favors a toll-based model.

In their joint bid, Meridiam Infrastructure and AECOM Technical Services Inc., both of New York City, also say tolls are the way to go.

“A preliminary financial analysis based on the traffic forecasts prepared by Wilbur Smith on behalf of MDOT and a series of assumptions revealed that the project (excluding the customs inspection plazas) can be financially viable without a government subsidy under a 50-year concession. While this analysis is preliminary in nature (revenue figures were not released as part of Wilbur Smith study), it is our assessment that toll revenues should be sufficient to cover costs for the bridge, the U.S. interchange and the toll plazas currently estimated at $1.48 billion.”

Australia’s Macquarie, on the other hand, wrote that it’s “preferred payment mechanism for this project is (to the extent MDOT and Transport Canada) wish to fund a portion of the project) a single, large construction payment at substantial completion, accompanied by availability payments through the operating period.”

Without border traffic revenue estimates, and the current bridge being nearby, tolls alone are too risky, the company said.

“As a result of these conditions, we do not believe that this project is financeable as a pure toll facility,” it wrote.

Here is how the joint DRIC partnership bills its development: “The preferred delivery mechanism for the bridge is a public-private partnership in the form of a long-term concession agreement which will seek to maximize private sector participation and financing to avoid the use of taxpayer dollars. The intent is for the bridge to be financially self-sustaining from a reasonable toll charged to its users. It is envisioned that the owners will form a joint venture to oversee the concession contract with the private sector.”

Walsh Construction Co., Chicago; PCL Civil Constructors Inc., Edmonton, in a joint interest bid favor availability payments. So does interested financier BMO Capital Markets.

The Toronto office of Spanish civil engineering/construction firm ACS Group wrote in its bid that it expects the governments to subsidize the project — rather than the private sector — if traffic revenue fails to meet expectations.

“It seems according to the information that has been made public, that for the project to be feasible in case of a funding gap (traffic and other sources of revenue not enough) MDOT and TC will have to assign public funds to the project, in form of construction payments and/or availability payments depending on their accessibility to resources and budgetary constraints of time.”

Here’s the latest on some of the leading questions about the Detroit River International Crossing project, and my best attempts to answer them based on what I’ve learned.

What is DRIC:
A proposal to link Ontario's Highway 401 and Michigan's I-75 by building a publicly owned bridge over the Detroit River between Detroit's industrial Delray neighborhood near Zug Island and Windsor's Brighton Beach area (landing between a power plant and salt plant). It would be an alternative to the privately owned Ambassador Bridge, which is about 2 miles away.

Why is the bridge needed:
Supporters say border traffic will eventually rebound from the decline that began in 1999, and a new link is needed to bolster trade because Detroit-Windsor is the busiest North American commerce crossing. There is also worry by some that trade could be lost to the crossings at Buffalo. Another justification is redundancy in case the Ambassador Bridge is closed because of terrorist attack or other reason.

How much will DRIC cost:
The overall price is $5.3 billion, and that includes Canadian highway work linked to DRIC but isn’t officially part of the partnership’s work. The work on the bridge, plazas, interchanges and approaches is estimated at $2.1 billion. It’s broken down by MDOT as:
~ U.S. bridge and approach: $501.6 million.
~ Canadian bridge and approach: $447.4 million
~ U.S. toll plaza: $150.6 million
~ U.S. General Services Administration plaza: $270 million
~ Canadian plaza: $387.6 million
~ Interstate 75 interchange: $420 million

Who will pay for it:
The preferred plan is for the private sector to build and operate the bridge, and it would collect tolls to pay its costs. The governments would jointly own the bridge. Otherwise, the U.S. and Canadian federal governments would fund most of the cost, with Michigan and Ontario picking up lesser shares. The private sector in P3 arrangements typically use bond or debt financing to pay for construction, and the concession agreement with the government owner(s) allows the company to collect the tolls to pay off the debt. If the governments have to build the bridge, it's unknown how it would be paid for. Neither the U.S. or Canada has identified financing mechanisms (specifics taxes, funds, formulas, etc.) in that case.

If the private sector builds the bridge, will it assume the financial risks?
That’s unclear, and probably too soon to tell. Twenty bids expressing interest in DRIC have been published by MDOT (link), but toll industry analyst Peter Samuel of Toll Road News notes skepticism in the letters: “The respondents strongly favor an availability payments model, whereby they get paid for providing the bridge and operating it, regardless of toll revenues. This means the major business risk is carried by the governments, not the investors. The unwillingness of responders to take any risk on toll revenues suggests they are highly skeptical about it as a self-financing project.” (Link)

What did Canada offer?
Transport Minister John Baird’s letter indicated that Canada is willing to pay up to $550 million of Michigan’s DRIC costs not otherwise paid for by the U.S. government or private sector.

Is this a loan?
It’s not completely clear. MDOT representatives, in conversations with reporters on Thursday, talked about interest rates not yet being set on the money, so that would indicate a loan. Terms must still be worked out, so it’s not yet know if Ottawa will simply write Lansing a check. It may be that simple.

Why did Canada offer the money?
Ottawa says it’s because the project is vitally important to the economy of both nations. However, opposition among Michigan lawmakers – who will vote by June 1 on MDOT’s continued financial participation in the project – probably played into Canada’s offer. The loan should lift some worry by Legislators that Michigan, already facing a $1.5 billion deficit along with MDOT project cutbacks, can’t afford DRIC. And the $550 million covers a good portion of the total U.S. cost, not must Michigan’s expected $100 million obligation.

How will it be paid back?
From toll revenue at the new bridge. Canada would collect Michigan’s share until the loan is paid off. If toll revenue fails to cover the basic interest, principal and operational costs, it’s unclear who would cover the difference. I’ve asked several times, but Canada hasn’t said if it will subsidize any deficit, but has expressed confidence the tolls will be enough to cover costs.

Are there examples of toll revenue estimates being so optimistic that projects ended up in trouble?
Yes. San Diego’s South Bay Expressway filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection this month. It’s owned by Australia’s Macquarie Infrastructure Group — one of the companies that told MDOT it’s interested in building DRIC. The firm estimated that 60,000 cars would use the road daily, but less than 23,000 actually did, and the road couldn’t meet its construction debt obligations. Investors in Australia’s privately funded toll roads have lost up to $3.5 billion in recent years because of overly optimistic traffic predictions (link). A majority of toll-road projects overestimated traffic levels in the first five years by at least 20 percent to 30 percent, according to a July 2008 report by the Center for Transportation Research at The University of Texas at Austin called “Estimated and Actual Usage of Toll Facilities” done by behalf of the Texas Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration. (Link)

If traffic is down at the border, will there be enough toll revenue?
That’s a major unknown. Analysts say MDOT’s traffic estimates are too optimistic, and note that the agency has made public any toll revenue predictions. The private sector will want revenue estimates before it will touch DRIC. If the tolls don’t generate enough money to cover construction financing debt and operational costs, someone will have to cover the difference. NOTE: Read Crain’s on Monday for my in-depth look at this particular concern.

What is the reaction in Canada to the loan offer?
Comments on Canadian news outlet websites were a mixture of anger and support. Ontario’s Sierra Club environmental group said DRIC will damage prairie land, and complained that Canada halted funding of Toronto’s light rail project while offering to loan Michigan cash for DRIC.

Why the urgency by Canada?
The Great White North relies on U.S. trade far more than this country relies Canada. There is also a desire to get commercial truck traffic out of downtown Windsor. Both countries also say the bridge will create construction and preserve or create additional jobs. Canada wants to grow trade to bolster its economy (as does Michigan). There is also interest from the local business community in gaining additional border options, but some critics say that’s a luxury rather than a necessity.

What has to happen next?
Many things: Michigan has to accept Canada’s offer. There’s also a June 1 deadline for the Legislature to vote on MDOT’s continued participation in the project. Lawmakers will also vote on the DRIC P3 legislation that passed the House Transportation Committee on Thursday. If MDOT gets the green light, and the loan terms are worked out and accepted, it could begin buying the land in Delray needed to DRIC. That’s expected to displace about 1,000 people and 257 homes, 43 businesses and nine nonprofits. There are also a number of DRIC-related lawsuits ongoing that must be solved. At some point, private sector partners would be picked from bids.

What’s the biggest unknown?
Funding. So far, there is no official commitment by the U.S. government of any money for DRIC. MDOT has said it has had discussions with federal agencies, but there is nothing on paper. Canada’s loan would cover most of the U.S. cost, however, which is likely why an offer of $550 million was made rather than just Michigan’s expected share of $100 million.

What is the Ambassador Bridge owner’s reaction to the loan?
The Detroit International Bridge Co., owned by Grosse Pointe trucking industrialist Manual “Matty” Moroun, issued a statement Thursday that amounted to a questioning of Gov. Jennifer Granholm’s loyalty and commitment to Michigan. She is Canadian-born, but became a U.S. citizen as a child. Passage of the P3 legislation and the Canadian loan offer are seen as double blows to DIBC.

Is there support for the Ambassador Bridge second span?
Yes, but much of it is quiet. Moroun’s willingness to pay for it himself has drawn GOP support in Lansing. The business community also favors the option of having a newer, bigger Ambassador Bridge. Jennifer Granholm is on record supporting the project. DIBC is under fire for failing to follow the terms of the $230 million Gateway project that linked a new interchange to the bridge, which has forced proponents to qualify their support. Also, DRIC’s own literature indicates that the six-lane new Ambassador Bridge span is needed in addition to a second crossing to handle expected future traffic: "At the beginning of the process it was determined that at least six (and possibly as many as 10) additional lanes were needed between Detroit and Windsor to accommodate the expected future traffic. The Ambassador Bridge Company’s current proposal is to replace their four-lane bridge with a six-lane bridge. This still leaves a need for at least four additional lanes to accommodate the expected future traffic. The DRIC and Ambassador Bridge projects complement each other." (Link)

Who is lobbying for the projects?
Moroun’s bridge company has hired Karoub Associates. The pro-DRIC Canadian Trucking Alliance in Toronto is paying Public Affairs Associates. Both are Lansing-based. A consortium of companies, including several DRIC contractors, has hired Lansing-based Marketing Resource Group Inc. to coordinate public/media relations (but not be an officially registered lobbyist). MRGI President Tom Shields has repeatedly refused to say who is actually paying him: “We are not going to differentiate between organizations who will contribute financially or join the coalition.” Shields noted that longtime Detroit political fixer Adolph Mongo, who has worked for Moroun in the past, is behind anti-DRIC radio spots. The bridge company said Mongo is doing the ads on his own. The number for Adolph Mongo & Associates Inc. was disconnected.