Why are we poised to tear down a Blue Water Bridge Plaza just finished 13 years ago, and build a new one? Having spent greater than $50 million and moved megatons of sand and concrete to elevate it up 24 feet, we’re now told there’s great need to bring it back down to ground zero. Whose need? There must have been an engineering reason, of incline or approach, to make it the right thing to do for the bridge then. Why is it wrong now? Let’s be careful of following the Department of Homeland Security up and down this Tower of Babel project, or we’ll be bankrupting taxpayers once again, with another do-over 13 years down the road. The new Environmental Impact Statement, and openness of MDOT staff, may give an excuse for an anticipated May 4^th sign off approval, but many basic questions of viability and common sense national security remain.

Our county and city administrators, the MDOT project manager, and the MDOT’s own website have done a decent job of pointing finger at the prime director—the Dept. of Homeland Security and its Customs Border Protection sub-agency. There are 5 "cooperating agencies" in this project: DHS/CBP, Environmental Protection Agency, MDOT, Federal Highway Agency, and Army Corps of Engineers—each with nominal project veto power. Of these, the least experienced, DHS/CBP created just 6 years ago, the new kid on the block, definitely rules the roost. Observe the dominant language of DHS/CBP defining the overriding reason for a new Bridge Plaza, in a letter included in the previous EIS appendix. [Appx D, p. 164]

To MDOT Bureau Director Susan Mortel, from DHS/CBP Executive Director Renee Smoot, Feb. 12, 2006:

"The security reports [in MDOT’S Executive Summary] are flawed by not considering the overriding goal of protecting the American public and economy from a terrorist attack by the introduction of a terrorist and terrorist vehicles into the United States. Many of the conclusions related to the security risks are flawed. The reports ignore an attack for the purpose of shutting the trade corridor between the U.S. and Canada."

In fact, our own U.S. government has been shutting down trade corridor everywhere, by its formidable economic, and security project, blunders.

The most recent EIS tries to re-orient the focus somewhat back to traffic problems. A claim is made that a new plaza could somehow reduce inbound wait time from 27 down to 3 minutes. Sounds good, but there are no specifics on how this is to happen. Going from 15 to 20 inbound booths, with no definite commitment by CBP for personnel increases to fully staff them, gives little hope that we’ll be waiting less to re-enter the U.S. And in the current post 911 atmosphere, one trash barrel bomb by a suspected terrorist in Manhattan, and we’ll again see troops on our Bridge Plaza, and 2 hour backups. It’s a mentality of fear that breeds wastefulness and poisons our economy. Our Canadian business partners complain bitterly and rightfully of a "thickening" of the border between us, and recommend special ambassadors from both countries to solve the stupidities. [ see PHTH 3-8-09 article " Officials seek bridge plan; Ambassadors would help ease crossing" ]

And there is still no discussion whatsoever of the new outbound inspection booth process. This will take up valuable space, and how much delay is involved? What are the wait times that will be created? Are we to be individually asked why are we leaving the U.S.? Will we need to show passports at these booths too? This is a whole new ballgame that could significantly increase total delays, for those of us who want to go visit Canada and return. It’s possible that this could effectively cancel out all time savings of any new inbound booths. Is this being done now at any other borders? If so, what is the delay track record for these newly instituted inspections? How do they help us be more secure? What is their cost benefit?

I don’t believe the Holiday Inn, Cawood Auto, nor another home, should be knocked down, until all the national security practical common sense questions are answered. In the Plaza plan, we are to re-route sewers and utilities, newly dug and buried, out from under it for $20 million. How much security can that possibly buy us? What is the probability that a terrorist will climb down a sewer tunnel in Port Huron, when the bridge & plaza can be attacked, at will, by a small plane loaded with explosives?

The DHS/CBP operates from a playbook they name their "Program of Requirements." Although there may be some elements of a truly classified nature, their manual is in sore need of scrutiny by unbiased outside citizen experts. Has there ever been an attack on a border bridge in the history or pre-history of our nation? What is the real likelihood of any such aggression ever in the foreseeable future? Has there even been one element of probable terrorism intent uncovered at any U.S. border crossing, north or south, since 911? These are unanswered questions that need answers, before the Port Huron border crossing becomes a shovel ready project for the Feds.

Every local leader and citizen knows we need a new bridge and connectors on I-94 over the Black River. Let’s do that now--a good constructive project that benefits the community and commerce, $150 million well spent. Postpone indefinitely the BWBP [$225 billion plus, to be badly spent], study a lower cost solution to the weave and other traffic problems in consult with the Canadians, and hire more U.S. Customs personnel to adequately staff the bridge. We need to take back responsibility for our local livelihoods from those in national agencies and their politicians, who want to sell us sham security they cannot provide, while lining the pockets of their own agendas. We have a beautiful Blue Water Bridge community. Heaven forbid it gets turned into a giant truck stop on the NAFTA highway. It’s impossible that it will ever become an impervious Fortress Port Huron.

Yours truly,