View Full Version : Henry says Crosstown is feds responsibility



Pages : [1] 2

Patrick
12-28-2004, 12:16 AM
Henry isn't completely against the state putting up a share of the money for the new Crosstown, but since it is a FEDERAL interstate, Henry doesn't think the state should have to pay half, which is what Istook was suggesting recently. I tend to agree with Henry. He's right on! It's a FEDERAL problem, not a state one. The FEDERAL government owns that highway. It's crucial to this nation.
It should be our representatives at the federal level (i.e. ISTOOK) lobbying for this.

--------
"Henry puts I-40 in fed's ball court: Congressional uncertainties make state budgeting efforts ‘very, very difficult’
by Janice Francis-Smith
The Journal Record
12/28/2004


Journal Record Photo
Oklahoma officials should wait until the federal transportation bill is passed before committing to fund a sizable share of a proposed $360 million Interstate 40 Crosstown project, Gov. Brad Henry said on Monday.
"Right now, it is very, very difficult for us to budget into the future when it comes to transportation," said Henry. "We haven't even gotten a six-year bill yet out of Congress, so we don't know what our federal dollars are going to be. We can't be obligating our state dollars."

So far, U.S. Rep. Ernest Istook, as chairman of the Transportation and Treasury Appropriations Subcommittee, and other members of Oklahoma's congressional delegation have secured $180 million in federal funds for the project, which would realign a 4.5-mile section of the interstate highway.

The portion of I-40 that runs right through the heart of Oklahoma City, bounded on the east by the I-35/I-235/I-40 interchange and extending west just past May Avenue, will be moved south of its current route. The project also includes plans to create a boulevard to access downtown along the current path of the highway.

Last week, Istook, R-Okla., urged local and state officials to consider forming public-private partnerships to help fill the remaining $180 million funding gap for the Crosstown project. Without local and state funding for the Crosstown, completion of the project could be delayed until 2014, said Istook.

Henry said he'd be happy to sit down with Oklahoma City Mayor Mick Cornett, members of Oklahoma's congressional delegation and state and local leaders to discuss "any and all possibilities to get the I-40 Crosstown project done."

However, maintaining existing roads and bridges in Oklahoma is a priority, said Henry.

"(The Crosstown) is certainly something that I'm supportive of and a priority, but I don't think state government can be looked to for that big a slice of this project," said Henry. "That's approaching nearly half of the cost of the project."

mranderson
12-28-2004, 06:04 AM
I agree. I took needs to get off his rump and get the funding we need.

Last time I checked, an Interstate freeway was just that... Inter (multipule) state (a segment of the country), hense Federal.

floater
12-28-2004, 09:00 AM
To be totally frank, I can't believe we keep returning this man to office.

mranderson
12-28-2004, 09:05 AM
To be totally frank, I can't believe we keep returning this man to office.

It is the incumbant factor. Most people are highly uneducated in politics and do not know how to choose a candidate. Therefore, they just keep voting for him.

To quote the woman who played the Grandmother in "Distinguised Gentelmen," "people are just use to voting for him."

Bad plan. I wish someone who cared would run against him. A person with a large bankroll and the guts to tell people what he his costing the state.

floater
12-28-2004, 09:12 AM
It is the incumbant factor. Most people are highly uneducated in politics and do not know how to choose a candidate. Therefore, they just keep voting for him.

To quote the woman who played the Grandmother in "Distinguised Gentelmen," "people are just use to voting for him."

Bad plan. I wish someone who cared would run against him. A person with a large bankroll and the guts to tell people what he his costing the state.

Hear, hear mranderson. Would somebody please stand up!! How about you???!!

And lol about The Distinguished Gentleman, the way Eddie Murphy's character used a deceased pol's signs and name (which resembled his own) to win. That was a funny movie.

mranderson
12-28-2004, 09:26 AM
Hear, hear mranderson. Would somebody please stand up!! How about you???!!

And lol about The Distinguished Gentleman, the way Eddie Murphy's character used a deceased pol's signs and name (which resembled his own) to win. That was a funny movie.

I quote lines from that movie quite often.

Float. If you can raise about three million bucks, I will announce my candidacy.

JOHNINSOKC
12-28-2004, 10:25 AM
It seems to me that Istook shoots down everything that is beneficial to the OKC area. First, he kills any chance of us having a light rail system in Bricktown/Downtown, now he isn't fighting for enough Federal funds to complete the Crosstown Expressway. He obviously doesn't think OKC will ever grow enough to warrant further expansion of our infrastructure. I hope he understands that if the new expressway isn't built soon, the current bridge may be in danger of collapsing in the next few years as traffic continues to increase. TIME and MONEY is crucial when it comes to this project. It should be among the top 5 projects nationwide for funding by the Federal government. Once again, we have people who say they will go to bat for us, but their actions aren't proving it.

mranderson
12-28-2004, 10:38 AM
It seems to me that Istook shoots down everything that is beneficial to the OKC area. First, he kills any chance of us having a light rail system in Bricktown/Downtown, now he isn't fighting for enough Federal funds to complete the Crosstown Expressway. He obviously doesn't think OKC will ever grow enough to warrant further expansion of our infrastructure. I hope he understands that if the new expressway isn't built soon, the current bridge may be in danger of collapsing in the next few years as traffic continues to increase. TIME and MONEY is crucial when it comes to this project. It should be among the top 5 projects nationwide for funding by the Federal government. Once again, we have people who say they will go to bat for us, but their actions aren't proving it.

This is why I started calling him "I took." I hate to say this, however, it may take a bridge collapse with mass casulty to make these people wake up.

We need to get on the ball with light rail, the new freeway AND replacing "I took."

okcpulse
12-28-2004, 11:58 AM
Istook, if you happen across this forum and this thread, I have just one request for you.... get out if our city and move to Salt Lake City. You'd fit right in seeing as how you give your Mormon buddies everything they want.

mranderson
12-28-2004, 12:26 PM
Istook, if you happen across this forum and this thread, I have just one request for you.... get out if our city and move to Salt Lake City. You'd fit right in seeing as how you give your Mormon buddies everything they want.

WELL SAID!! :iagree:

floater
12-28-2004, 01:07 PM
Float. If you can raise about three million bucks, I will announce my candidacy.

How about $1 million and some crazy ideas and statements that ensure ink and airtime with the local press. That oughtta do it.

mranderson
12-28-2004, 01:12 PM
How about $1 million and some crazy ideas and statements that ensure ink and airtime with the local press. That oughtta do it.

Might work. How much would I took spend to beat me?

HOT ROD
12-28-2004, 01:49 PM
To be totally frank, I can't believe we keep returning this man to office.

As in Istook:Sperm: ?

my point totally.

Patrick
12-28-2004, 10:03 PM
I think being Republican has a lot to do with I took staying in office...unfortunately, many people vote on single issues, party being one of them.

mranderson
12-29-2004, 09:00 AM
I heard this morning that the state of Oklahoma has about 300 or so million dollars in surplus funds.

A lot of people want this to go into pay raises for teachers and other state employees. Although they deserve it, look at another side of the coin.

Do we pay our teachers more now or do we prevent a bridge collapse that could be among the highest casulty count in our state's history?

Midtowner
12-29-2004, 09:41 AM
I heard this morning that the state of Oklahoma has about 300 or so million dollars in surplus funds.

A lot of people want this to go into pay raises for teachers and other state employees. Although they deserve it, look at another side of the coin.

Do we pay our teachers more now or do we prevent a bridge collapse that could be among the highest casulty count in our state's history?

Think of the children.

Patrick
12-29-2004, 11:56 PM
I just don't think it's the state's responsiblity to fill that large of a funding gap in the Crosstown. As I've said all along, it's not our highway...it's the FEDERAL government's. It's their responsiblity to replace it. Sure, I wouldn't be opposed to the state chipping in some to get the project completed, but not half of the price-tag. Again, Istook needs to get to work and realize this is a federal issue, not a state one.

Now, our schools on the other hand...they're a state issue. Our teachers and state employees have been some of the lowest payed in the country for years now. I'm glad to see we're investing in our future through education. It's about time! Maybe for once, our teacher graduates will actually stay here.

okcpulse
12-30-2004, 12:24 PM
It is the responsibility of the federal government to replace interstate highways, however I do believe Oklahoma City is responsible for the planned boulevard, which will no longer fall under federal jurisdiction after I-40 is relocated. The cost estimate for the boulevard is $35 million. I don't think Oklahoma City should have a problem forking over funds, but not for the construction of I-40 itself.

All that being said, I-40 through western Oklahoma has been neglected for far too long, and has been an annoyance to out-of-state travelers, and an embarrassment on our behalf. It is a dangerous stretch of road, and the current reconstruction between Banner Road and US-81 is not enough. I hope more is on the way.

mranderson
12-30-2004, 12:33 PM
Although I agree the funds for the new freeway should be federal, it is obvious I took is not going to help get them.

So, the best thing to do is bite the bullet and pay for the thing. Our teachers will get pay raises via lottery funds, so that is already planned.

I would rather see the state bite the bullet and save some lives than see Oklahoma City in the national headlines because some people would not help get the funds, thus resulting in the collapse of a six mile long bridge and the loss of a lot of lives.

Patrick
12-30-2004, 05:22 PM
I don't think ODOT would allow the bridge to deteriorate that far...they'll close it before it collapses, and then it will definitely become an issue for the feds.

OKC Pulse, I agree with you...the city should be resonsible for the planned boulevard, since it's not a federal project. Everything else should be constructed with federal funds. I hope Istook is finally being exposed. Hopefully next time we can get someone else in office that can fight for the money we need, instead of dishing out money to Salt Lake City.

metro
01-01-2005, 12:19 PM
I knew some of you had questions regarding the light rail so here it is:

Creating Connections

City leaders look at building a light rail system

The transportation is seen as a draw to the professional "creative class."

By Steve Lackmeyer, Staff Writer

Dreamers, get out your checklists.

Civic leaders a decade ago dared to suggest a massive overhaul of the inner-city including construction of an arena, ballpark, canal and library-learning center.

And while at it, why not renovate the convention center and arts hall? Launch a new trolley system and do something big with the neglected North Canadian River?

A few years later, that vision, MAPS, was on its way to becoming a reality. So another vision was hatched. This one would be MAPS for Kids, the overhaul of city-area public schools.

The Oklahoma Centennial Commission is staying busy making its own mark with city improvements, including the Oklahoma Land Run Monument, Centennial Clock Towers and plans for a large fountain at Reno Avenue and Mickey Mantle Drive in Bricktown.

Looking ahead, what’s next?

If the question is what’s the next big investment, Chairman Burns Hargis of the Greater Oklahoma City Chamber of Commerce has an answer: light rail.

Even after repeated criticism by U.S. Rep. Ernest Istook, R-Warr Acres, and his opposition to federal funding for light rail, Hargis speaks about it with the passion of a Sunday preacher.

Hargis agrees with Istook that by only looking at traffic congestion, a light rail system doesn’t make sense for Oklahoma City.

Hargis, however, says he is looking at the city’s long-term needs and future economic development.

"In downtown Oklahoma City, where we want to have a hub of business, if a company wants to locate downtown, they’re looking at a challenge of where to park and how much it will cost," Hargis said. "With light rail, that issue becomes infinitely more manageable."

A light rail system, Hargis said, also would benefit the state Capitol, Tinker Air Force Base, the health sciences district and struggling inner-city neighborhoods.

Hargis cites Portland, Ore., and Dallas as examples of how light rail systems stimulate development and spur their own passenger growth.

"This gives us an opportunity to get ahead of the curve," Hargis said. "It enables us to plan the development of our city in an orderly way."

Hargis also argues light rail is proving popular with the next generation.

"They don’t have to worry about traffic, they can read a book along the way, and it creates exciting venues along the way," Hargis said.

Voters will likely first be asked to approve a hotel room tax increase to pay for improvements at State Fair Park. A master plan calls for an overhaul of the park, fixing up livestock barns, adding horse show venues and creating new matching facades for all exhibit buildings.

Meanwhile, promoters of the North Canadian River are drawing up their own master plan that calls for the conversion of tributaries into recreational canals linking the waterway to Stockyards City, Capitol Hill and State Fair Park.

Planners already have maps showing extensions of the Brick-town Canal to the Ford Center and Cox Convention Center.

"Things like that can happen now because we’ve done things that are tougher," said Jim Bruza, whose firm coordinated the MAPS program.

The private sector also is expected to influence what happens next. Urban Renewal Director Joe-Van Bullard predicts a current interest in downtown housing won’t subside anytime soon.

"We’ve only scratched the surface," Bullard said. "We won’t be bringing on 1,000 units a year for the next five years. But we’ll make steady progress. We can bring on 250 units every 18 months for a few years, so the market can absorb it."

Oklahoma City leaders were recently told the economic competition of the future is not for industry, but the intellectual talent whose presence can turn a community into a world player.

To lure what’s been dubbed "the creative class," Hargis insists the city must always be looking at itself, striving to improve its quality of life.

"When you see a house run down, what does it say to you? It says that person has no pride," Hargis said. "If we don’t invest in the city, how it functions and how it appears, we’re sending a message outside and inside. We’re sending a message that we don’t have the pride in what we have."

metro
01-01-2005, 12:38 PM
Rail System Plan Lost Its Steam

Great idea for downtown lacked funds, some interest.

By Steve Lackmeyer, Staff Writer

Campaigning for the MAPS tax, city officials promised all of the projects would be completed as promised with funds that voters approved.

The ballot and campaign, however, included one "if."

For more than a decade, civic leaders studied and debated the potential of constructing a light rail system linking downtown with other major destinations including the zoo, racetrack and airport.

Studies showed $16 million was needed for the link between downtown and the Interstate 40/ Meridian Avenue hotel corridor promised on the MAPS ballot.

But MAPS only provided $3 million for the project. The remainder of the project depended on winning federal grants.

Plans called for 2.7 miles of track to be laid on streets near Bricktown and I-40 with nine stops on a downtown loop.

Three years after the passage of MAPS, the city appeared to be on its way to obtaining $10 million through Sen. Don Nickles, R-Ponca City.

But the funding ran into opposition in the House from Rep. Ernest Istook, R-Warr Acres.

Istook called the project a waste of federal money in a letter to Rep. Frank Wolf, a Virginia Republican who was chairman of the House Appropriations subcommittee on transportation.

Istook argued the system would lose money, and studies suggested ridership wouldn’t support its construction.

City leaders continued to push for the light rail funding over the next couple years and even went so far as to cut track inlays into the newly brick-paved Mickey Mantle Drive before giving up the fight.

Istook, meanwhile, led efforts to win $4.6 million in federal funding for a rubber-tire shuttle resembling vintage trolleys that loop throughout downtown and connect to the Meridian Avenue hotel corridor and Stockyards City.

The city also proceeded to build trolley shelters along Meridian Avenue and downtown.

Routes for the Oklahoma Spirit trolleys have changed three times since service started in June 1999 — proof, Istook said, that a fixed light rail system would have been a poor alternative.

The Oklahoma Spirit trolleys have carried an average of 680,000 passengers a year since 1999.

Steve Lackmeyer: 475-3541, slackmeyer@oklahoman.com

Patrick
01-03-2005, 11:10 PM
Unfortuntaly, this highlights what I've been saying about Istook for awhile now. Istook voted for light rail for Salt Lake, but against light rail for OKC. I thought this guy was supposed to be representing our district. Seems like he's representing Salt Lake City more than he's representing us. Nickles had the money on the table and Istook faught against it. That's a crying shame.

Well, the rubber trolley system has been in place for awhile now. I think we finally have a good route lined up. How about building rail along the line now?

I think Burns Hargis is on the money. I wish he'd run against Istook!

Midtowner
01-04-2005, 09:36 AM
I haven't looked into the feasibilty studies for Salt Lake. I did, however, look at the $500,000 study that Istook funded through COTPA as to whether a light rail or rubber tire solution would be more appropriate. It found the later as being appropriate.

I have a few gripes about the rubber tire system.

It closes at 8PM M-W, that makes it basically useless to me for travel to and from Bricktown (usually there's street parking down there on those days, so not a huge deal).

It closes at 11PM on every other day -- again, this makes Bricktown a lot less accessable to me. I've walked accross downtown at night. I have a feeling that it's not a smart place to be at that time unless you're heavily armed.

The schedule is just plain wrong. Says it runs every 20 minutes. I've waited for it longer than 20 minutes. I wish they'd run 2 blue-line trollies at a time.

I think there are some long-term advantages to the rail system, but for half-a-million dollars, I think they were able to adequately weigh building the system now vs. later.

Sure, the SLC thing may have been crooked as heck, then again, due that city's demographics, etc. it could have actually been something that was needed. Ultimately, I don't think the two systems really effect one-another.

El Gato Pollo Loco!!!
01-04-2005, 11:29 AM
Me personally, I'd like a system....or course it would be nice if they had bike racks on all the buses also...

Me <-----livin' the pipe dream

Patrick
01-04-2005, 12:25 PM
Bike racks actually make a lot of sense. A few years back OCART made this its first goal as an interest group. Unfortunately, those in power at the time, weren't very transit oriented. Talking to them about improving transit, was kind of liek trying to talk to Luther Trent or Karen Carney about the need to build the East Concourse at the airport. They just didn't get it. Fortunately, young blood from the "creative class" is taking over our city government now. Our mayor, Mick Cornett, is jsut one example of this "young blood." I think he's more open to discussing the need for commuter rail transit for our city.

By the way....a rail trolley system wasn't needed for Salt Lake either. If oyu've ever been there, you'd see that it wasn't anymore needed than ours was. It still would've been nice to have a railed trolley system serving the downtown area and Meridian Hotel district.

Sooner&RiceGrad
01-12-2005, 08:34 PM
It is the damn feds responsiblity BECAUSE it is a federal highway with over 100,000 cars a day. 60% of which is freight trucks, which usually come in from OUR OF STATE. OKC is also a MAJOR travel hub. I 40 is absolutely their damn responsibilty.

About Henry: I just don't consider him the governor. Period. I consider Tom Coburn our "interim governor" lol. Things will look up in 2006, don't fret.

renffahcs
01-12-2005, 10:27 PM
Hey, in my opinion grab all that good blue state money if you can!! They would just waste it anyway!

Sooner&RiceGrad
01-12-2005, 10:30 PM
Crap. That OUR OF STATE, is almost what you could call Engrish. It is supposed to be out of state, lol.

jt450
01-30-2005, 04:34 PM
I can't believe people on this thread that don't know what they're talking about.

Most of the major roads in Oklahoma are federal roads. They have federal highway designations. Yet the state pays to maintain them and helps pay to build and renovate them. That's the system. I-40 is no different, yet Brad Henry expects the state shouldn't have to put a penny into Oklahoma's biggest road project? How inane! Istook has helped get $180-million for I-40 so far--and that's a whole lot better than the projects in other states. How much has Brad Henry helped?? ZERO!

I think these folks that want light rail are the same type of folks. They aren't providing a single penny, but want to criticize Istook for not miraculously providing them hundreds of millions of dollars to fund their boondoogle.

People who do nothing are criticizing the only one who's accomplishing anything (Istook). Get real, folks!


[QUOTE=Patrick]Henry isn't completely against the state putting up a share of the money for the new Crosstown, but since it is a FEDERAL interstate, Henry doesn't think the state should have to pay half, which is what Istook was suggesting recently. I tend to agree with Henry. He's right on! It's a FEDERAL problem, not a state one. The FEDERAL government owns that highway. It's crucial to this nation.
It should be our representatives at the federal level (i.e. ISTOOK) lobbying for this.

jt450
01-30-2005, 04:36 PM
I can't believe people on this thread that don't know what they're talking about.

Tens of thousands of Oklahoma City folks use I-40 every day. What would they do without it?

Most of the major roads in Oklahoma are federal roads. They have federal highway designations. But they carry our local traffice! And the state pays to maintain them and helps pay to build and renovate them. That's the system. I-40 is no different, yet Brad Henry expects the state shouldn't have to put a penny into Oklahoma's biggest road project? How inane! Istook has helped get $180-million for I-40 so far--and that's a whole lot better than the projects in other states. How much has Brad Henry helped?? ZERO!

I think these folks that want light rail are the same type of folks. They aren't providing a single penny, but want to criticize Istook for not miraculously providing them hundreds of millions of dollars to fund their boondoogle.

People who do nothing are criticizing the only one who's accomplishing anything (Istook). Get real, folks!


Henry isn't completely against the state putting up a share of the money for the new Crosstown, but since it is a FEDERAL interstate, Henry doesn't think the state should have to pay half, which is what Istook was suggesting recently. I tend to agree with Henry. He's right on! It's a FEDERAL problem, not a state one. The FEDERAL government owns that highway. It's crucial to this nation.
It should be our representatives at the federal level (i.e. ISTOOK) lobbying for this.

mranderson
01-30-2005, 05:21 PM
Istook took money earmarked for Oklahoma City's light rail system and gave it to Salt Lake City. He does NOT look out for us. He can lobby for enough funds to build the freeway if he wants to. He clearly is not interested in his own state.

I suspect a few fleeting people are caught in the brainwashing Istook is spewing. Hence. I Took.

Midtowner
01-30-2005, 05:26 PM
Istook took money earmarked for Oklahoma City's light rail system and gave it to Salt Lake City. He does NOT look out for us. He can lobby for enough funds to build the freeway if he wants to. He clearly is not interested in his own state.

I suspect a few fleeting people are caught in the brainwashing Istook is spewing. Hence. I Took.

Federal funding is not a zero-sum game. You can't say that money from one project went directly to another. We've discussed this before, and if you recall the argument for light rail is pretty darned weak. The fact is that we did spend $500,000 studying how effective it could be, and we decided that it'd be a waste of money.

At this stage in the game, it would almost have certainly been a waste of money. No light rail system that I know of is not subsidized somehow by public funds. If you've ever ridden the trolley system downtown (and I do often), you'll note that the cars are absolutely never full. Higher capacity, more expensive light rail would accomplish nothing that the rubber tire system we have now doesn't already take care of.

mranderson
01-30-2005, 06:14 PM
Let's not go there. The light rail was something a lot of people do not know exists... An example.:elmer3:

Patrick
01-31-2005, 08:34 PM
I can't believe people on this thread that don't know what they're talking about.

Tens of thousands of Oklahoma City folks use I-40 every day. What would they do without it?

Most of the major roads in Oklahoma are federal roads. They have federal highway designations. But they carry our local traffice! And the state pays to maintain them and helps pay to build and renovate them. That's the system. I-40 is no different, yet Brad Henry expects the state shouldn't have to put a penny into Oklahoma's biggest road project? How inane! Istook has helped get $180-million for I-40 so far--and that's a whole lot better than the projects in other states. How much has Brad Henry helped?? ZERO!

I think these folks that want light rail are the same type of folks. They aren't providing a single penny, but want to criticize Istook for not miraculously providing them hundreds of millions of dollars to fund their boondoogle.

People who do nothing are criticizing the only one who's accomplishing anything (Istook). Get real, folks!

Oh, we know what we're talking about alright. We've researched all the facts.

Actually the majority of the roads in this state are state roads, not federal. The only federal roads are I-40, I-240, and I-35. The rest are state roads, including I-44 which is a state turnpike.

The majority of those that use I-40 are out-of-town trucks. Probably about 35% of the traffic is local. That's what ACOG told me last time I spoke with them.

I don't think the state should have to fork over HALF of the money for this project...again, it's a FEDERAL highway. Sure, I do think the state should invest something into this though....maybe 35% since that's the percentage of local traffic that uses that stretch. I'm sure Henry will make some sort of contribution, but it shouldn't be for half of the project. Afterall, why should he give $180 million to the Crosstown, when I-44 through the middle of Tulsa needs the money just as bad...and that's a state turnpike.

Concerning light rail....the money was there. Inhofe and Nichols had the federal grants already approved for our rail system. Istook voted against receiving it, saying it was a waste of federal funds. A lot of us here want light rail. Many of us would be willing to pay for it, if a bond issue or something similar came up for vote. It's hard to put a cent into a light rail system when there's no system in place to receive the funds for this purpose.

Midtowner
01-31-2005, 09:07 PM
Tell the whole story about light rail. There was a $500,000 COTPA study that said that it'd be a waste of money. All of Istook's correspondence that is public record (and there is quite a bit of it) indicates that this was a major factor in his decision.

In this case, I have to hand it to him. If more congressmen/women would refuse to "Bring home the bacon" and ensure that federal money was going to the best use possible, we'd pay less taxes and have an improved quality of government.

Of course, I don't think that much of Istook really. I just think he was on point with this particular decision. The only additional factor that I could give you to support what he did in approving of light rail for Salt Lake would be that they have a HORRIBLE smog problem. I'm sure their studies came up with different numbers as well.

Patrick, this is to request that you unlock and 'bump' the light rail thread.

Patrick
01-31-2005, 09:27 PM
This is just an issue we can agree to disagree on. Let's let the thread move on as you suggest.

Midtowner
01-31-2005, 09:30 PM
This is just an issue we can agree to disagree on. Let's let the thread move on as you suggest.

I'd like to repeat my request that you reopen that thread. There are some new posters here, and I spent a lot of time researching my points. It's a conversation that keeps coming up, I'd like to try to move as much of that to one thread as possible.

mranderson
01-31-2005, 09:32 PM
That thread is one of several that would open too many wounds.

We are at an empasse. Midtowner is against light rail, the rest are for it. Let it rest in peace. I am tired of the same old argument. We always go in circles.:fighting3

Patrick
01-31-2005, 09:47 PM
I think we've already stated our points here, and it wouldn't really be worth anything to reopen a thread from months ago. It would simply be beating a dead horse.

But, since Midtowner wishes for everyone to see his work that he put into researching this topic to back up his opinion, if you're interested, feel free to view the discussion at the following link:

http://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=797

This is the thread Midtowner was referring to.

Jay
02-01-2005, 01:22 AM
I would agree definitely a dead horse.........However, rest easy Henry will only serve one term.

I have a feeling the govenors race will be interesting to say the least. Sleepy Brad will have his doors blown off by most of the canidates.

My guesses are Humphreys, Watts, Anthony, Nickles or maybe a local businessman that is tired of seeing this state spinning its wheels.

2007 will be a banner year for Oklahoma, the centennial, a new govenor and fewer crusty legislators.

Sooner&RiceGrad
02-01-2005, 06:46 AM
He might run for president. On whatever level, state or nation, he will get blown away by his "Read Y'all" program. Isn't that funny?

Midtowner
02-01-2005, 06:53 AM
I would agree definitely a dead horse.........However, rest easy Henry will only serve one term.

I have a feeling the govenors race will be interesting to say the least. Sleepy Brad will have his doors blown off by most of the canidates.

My guesses are Humphreys, Watts, Anthony, Nickles or maybe a local businessman that is tired of seeing this state spinning its wheels.

2007 will be a banner year for Oklahoma, the centennial, a new govenor and fewer crusty legislators.

Think Orza might run again? I really like Orza. He said he was done last time, but I think he'll go. He's one of those guys where you know that if he wins the primary and can appeal to the extremist voters of the party that he appeals enough to the moderates that he can be elected.

When I was on UCO's TV station, I gave Orza a lot more coverage than I gave to other candidates. Yeah, I was the biased media... how 'bout that?

mranderson
02-01-2005, 07:25 AM
He might run for president. On whatever level, state or nation, he will get blown away by his "Read Y'all" program. Isn't that funny?

Who is "he?"

Keith
02-01-2005, 07:39 AM
We are used to bias media around here, it's nothing new.

In 2007, I do hope Orza runs against Henry. I would definitely vote for Orza, unless the republican candidate is better, and send ole Brad out to the pasture.

I don't care for Humphries at all, however, it wouldn't bother me to have Anthony, Watts, or Nickles as our governor. As oklacity75 put it, at least we would not be spinning our wheels.

Midtowner
02-01-2005, 07:53 AM
We are used to bias media around here, it's nothing new.

In 2007, I do hope Orza runs against Henry. I would definitely vote for Orza, unless the republican candidate is better, and send ole Brad out to the pasture.

I don't care for Humphries at all, however, it wouldn't bother me to have Anthony, Watts, or Nickles as our governor. As oklacity75 put it, at least we would not be spinning our wheels.

I like Orza and Anthony because they tend to say exactly what's on their mind. They are both above corruption and completely trustworthy. I can't say much for Watts or Nickles. They don't have much track record when it comes to exposing the 'good 'ol boys'.

Orza really made a name for himself ferretting out corruption when he was an investigative reporter for Channel 5. Of course, we all know what Anthony did when he was approached with bribe money by SBC.

Those two are pretty well beyond reproach. It is because of that though that the big money will be against them as it always has been. The big donors want someone that will listen to them and deliver what they want. In the past, Humphries has been that guy (hence the huge donations he commanded). I'd really like to see a race between Orza and Anthony though.

But people tend to vote for whoever has the flashiest commercials. Who knows what could happen in this state if we had politicians that answered to the people and not to the special interests?

Sooner&RiceGrad
02-01-2005, 01:56 PM
(quote^)

"He" is Henry.

Patrick
02-01-2005, 05:34 PM
Since when was the last time this state voted against an incumbent? Doesn't happen very often.

I'd actually vote for Oraza too. I voted for him in the last primary. Oraza is a real Oklahoman, not a Democrat or Republican.

Of course, I liked Gary Richardson too. If you read his platform, you definitely concluded that he knew what he was talking about.

The only reason Henry won was because the Republicans didn't run a better candidate.

To be real honest with you, I don't think we've had a decent governor since George Nigh. It's been awhile. Keating definitely wasn't great....he sure wasted tax payer money on a dumb dome and left Henry with a huge budget loss.

Midtowner
02-01-2005, 05:53 PM
I really like what Henry has done with this crosstown money. He's effectively killed it without opposing it. By saying that it is a federal responsibility, he's requiring money that will never come. Kind of smart actually.

jt450
02-06-2005, 10:19 AM
It sounds like you agree with me now. Istook never asked the state to pay for half the project. He said it was wrong for the state and the city to pay zero (which is what they've paid so far). 35% is a lot better than zero, and I bet Istook would also agree with you about 35% being fair.

But so far Brad Henry hasn't agreed to a single penny.




I don't think the state should have to fork over HALF of the money for this project...again, it's a FEDERAL highway. Sure, I do think the state should invest something into this though....maybe 35% since that's the percentage of local traffic that uses that stretch. I'm sure Henry will make some sort of contribution, but it shouldn't be for half of the project. Afterall, why should he give $180 million to the Crosstown, when I-44 through the middle of Tulsa needs the money just as bad...and that's a state turnpike.

Midtowner
02-06-2005, 10:24 AM
It sounds like you agree with me now. Istook never asked the state to pay for half the project. He said it was wrong for the state and the city to pay zero (which is what they've paid so far). 35% is a lot better than zero, and I bet Istook would also agree with you about 35% being fair.

But so far Brad Henry hasn't agreed to a single penny.

The more I look into this project, the less I like it. The reasons are fairly complex. Henry is smart not to oppose the project openly. His current strategy is really win-win. Either he the project just dies a quiet death, or the project is fully funded by the federal government.

gtelmore
04-07-2005, 05:35 PM
From: Tom Elmore, North American Transportation Institute
AOL customer, gtelmore

Re: "Bridge Collapse"

The folks who ginned up the "fuel tax increase proposal" are the same folks who sold you the "New Crosstown" -- and the idea that the existing Crosstown is "about to fall down." They're in the habit of avoiding "full disclosure."

Call ODOT Bridge Division. Ask them if the Crosstown is "about to fall down." Don't take any innuendo or skating around it. "Yes," or "No?" is the question.

Even ODOT has strict safety standards. Many truly deficient bridges around the state are posted limiting heavy truck gross weights or prohibiting certain trucks altogether -- but NOT the Crosstown. About one-third of daily traffic on the Crosstown is heavy trucks, overwhelmingly THROUGH trucks. These could easily be rerouted around I-44 / I-240 and the Kilpatrick Turnpike if structural safety was really a problem -- but it isn't.

When pressed before the Norman City Council last year, ODOT Director Gary Ridley admitted "the Crosstown is not unsafe." A now retired, longtime bridge division director says the Crosstown is safe and structurally sound. It needs to be redecked -- which could be done much, much, much more cheaply than replacing it. Questioned about this, the current ODOT bridge staffer most knowledgable about the Crosstown said, "Please don't ask me to comment on that. You know the people you quote are reliable. You have no idea how much pressure we're under in this division to help sell the new highway project."

Look for a thin asphalt overlay to be applied to the road deck on the old Crosstown to stabilize it for interim use -- but only if and when the Union Station rail yard is excavated. At that point, the fait accompli will be complete, they think -- but until that moment, the old Crosstown deck is "useful" because, while not unsafe, any sizable chunk of concrete falling from it becomes a "media event" they can use to convince us all that "it's about to fall down." Check the history of the Crosstown and you'll see that parking underneath it was suspended years ago -- because chunks of concrete have nearly always fallen from the deck -- too many, too heavy TRUCKS are largely to blame.

Use the "intelligent transport system" digital signs now erected east and west of the Crosstown to reroute through trucks around it and that traffic counts drop back well within design standards -- while providing better, safer routes for the trucks. A new and improved deck with the addition of modern, corrosion-resistant materials and minor structural upgrades would allow the "old Crosstown" to serve indefinitely.

The "open secret" is that the "New Crosstown plan" is much more about redevelopment of the Riverside area than it is about transportation, but redevelopment of Union Station as a multimodal center would be much better for all involved (including our highway system), as is being proved in Western cities from Little Rock to Portland.

ODOT leadership's policies have put our state into perhaps $40 billion of unfunded highway maintenance need on existing roads, apparently growing at about 40% a year - not the track record of responsible people. When he came back to ODOT as director (after a stint as XD of the state Asphalt Association), Gary Ridley said he would practice a conservative, "fix it first" strategy. Now, however, he says, "we'll start on the Crosstown as if we had the money to finish it." Get the kitty out on the limb, in other words; government by fait accompli -- the "Capitol Dome Strategy." All this to benefit the highway contractors and developers at the expense of the rest of us instead of respectful, conservative, intelligent reuse of existing assets.

Some say we inherit the time in which we live from our forebears. Others say we borrow it from our children. Consider the stunning cynicsm of the "New Crosstown Plan" to destroy the irreplaceable Union Station rail yard: Desecrating this elegant gift of our great grandparents in order to keep our unborn grandchildren in unfunded highway maintenance debt.

It can't be justified.

Governor Henry can -- and must stop it. It's time for an independent review, or perhaps even a Grand Jury probe of the "New Crosstown" route decision.

TOM ELMORE

travis
04-07-2005, 08:04 PM
I think Tom may be right on this. Although I think the crosstown bridge should be replace for reasons I have previously stated, I think this plan is a little overambitious. I believe the proposed I-40 route was probably more of an efort to get federal dollars in to the state. Think back to when this first got underway, when the economy was better and the government was running a surplus. There was a lot more federal money available for such projects, so why not make it grand. Now the federal money is largely gone, what they get each year for this project will barely cover inflation and rising construction costs. With the current increase in steel prices, and the rising cost of fuel, the price tag will go higher. But now they are kind of stuck since they have already comitted money to the final design and have bought most of the ROW. This project may get built eventually, but it will be much later than the 2008 date currently stated.

Also, don't be surprised if the final design doesn't look as good as the models they made.

TheImmortal
04-08-2005, 08:50 AM
I wonder how much they are going to allow the cost to increase. I havn't checked the latest price but i believe it started around 350 million then went to 360, 370, and i think its at 380 million now. I bet if anything, by the time this project is finished it will be way over schedule and over budget. This is just a bad deal from almost any angle in my opinion.

bubfloyd
04-08-2005, 09:13 AM
Also, don't be surprised if the final design doesn't look as good as the models they made.

Truly that would be The worst of all worlds. As it now stands, a committee called the "I-40 Enhancement Committee" has labored tirelessly to insure that the appearance of a completed new I-40 would be much more acceptable. Elements now in the design include a wide pedestrian bridge, decorative treatment of the concrete sides of the below grade portion, lots of landscaping, decorative railings on the underpasses etc. Also, OKC City Council passed an ordinance banning billboards along much of the new roadway.

Of course, ODOT could claim that the new highway is so important that all available funds must be used to construct a bare-bones corridor and ax all the eye candy. A new below grade eye sore woud be born unless State or City money found its way into the project. Not very likely with todays budgets.

Patrick
04-11-2005, 12:10 AM
I have been with Tom all along. Like Tom, I've never really gotten my questions answered. Almost every city has crosstown bridges similar to ours, although not necessarily as long. Many are just as old. The only difference? They maintain theirs. We could do the same by simply redecking the crosstown for much less. But as Tom mentions, the would mean less money for local contractors and local business.

I'm not necessarily sure I agree with the conpiracy theory. I don't think they're purposely trying to destroy Union Station Rail Yard. I think they're just using that route because the rail right away is already cleared, so it would be the easiest to put a highway through. Problem is, they don't understand just how important that rail route is to the future of commuter rail transit in our city.

Do we need commuter rail transit now? No, of course not. Do we need to start planning for future commuter rail transit? Absolutely.

I'm not sure people really understand how valuable the Union Station Rail Yard is to our future as a progressive city. Maybe they understand and simply don't care.

Afterall, it all seems to be about money in the short term. Destroying the Union Station Rail Yard creates highway jobs now, and will create rail yard contruction jobs later. Who will be paying for all of this our kids' kids' kids!

Jay
04-11-2005, 01:08 AM
What you have to understand is that most Oklahoma Citians see mass transit as a social program. Then you have the people out there like myself that think COTPA has tainted the city's mass transit system. To me COTPA is nothing more than shell game. They never have enough money and they always cut routes where their needed the most. They never cut routes that could go without bus service. Such as the nearly empty bus I see rolling down Memorial everyday.

I agree with all of you. We do need better mass transit system in our city. I support light rail and I think it would be an asset to our city. We just need to disolve COTPA before we do it. If COTPA is still in place when light rail comes to this city you can guarantee the light rail system will be in debt with in 10 years of its start date if not sooner.

Our cities mass transit system needs a serious overhall. We need better routes, longer operating hours (how many other major cities shut down service in the evening) and easier access. Its hard to convince someone to ride the bus when they have to walk eight blocks to a bus stop.

Midtowner
04-11-2005, 06:47 AM
COTPA is utterly and completely incompetant.

I've said it before -- the Santa Fe Parking Garage, a 30 year old parking garage (should be a cash cow, right?) has never been in the black. This information coming from a friend of mine who has seen some COTPA bond applications.

Patrick
04-11-2005, 11:55 AM
We're going to have to change the image of our bus system as well. Currently, it's viewed as mostly a service for the homeless population. Trying to solve this stereotype is going to be challenging.

bubfloyd
04-11-2005, 01:59 PM
Oklacity75 Wrote: Our cities mass transit system needs a serious overhall.

And they can start with those butt-ugly rolling billboard buses. Those things have no customer appeal whatsoever. The little red trolley styled rigs are rough riding as heck, but at least you can see in the windows. There is also a smaller, lower to the ground bus that seems to be more the proper size and look.

Bus transit in OKC hasn't been any good since about 1965. Too much ground to cover and too few riders. Spraaaaaawl. City buses used to also be most of the school buses in the OKC district and that makes lots of sense to me today. I'm not sure when or why that went away. I went away for a few years around that time and when I came back in the early 70's. Bad bus system and hundreds of little yellow school buses.