Being widened in the East Norman area but none of it is being changed to Interstate standards.

Traffic Talk: State Highway 9 in Norman set for widening | News OK (http://newsok.com/traffic-talk-state-highway-9-in-norman-set-for-widening/article/3898253)

Being widened in the East Norman area but none of it is being changed to Interstate standards.

Traffic Talk: State Highway 9 in Norman set for widening | News OK (http://newsok.com/traffic-talk-state-highway-9-in-norman-set-for-widening/article/3898253)

Since they seemed to have no imminent plans to upgrade the section west of i35 which meets up with the spur to the turnpike, highway 62 & highway 4 to interstate standards; I really had no expectation they would have been doing so east of SE 24th anytime soon.

Since they seemed to have no imminent plans to upgrade the section west of i35 which meets up with the spur to the turnpike, highway 62 & highway 4 to interstate standards; I really had no expectation they would have been doing so east of SE 24th anytime soon.

I didn't either, but some posters here think that is necessary.

I didn't either, but some posters here think that is necessary.

true, but let's be real. that particular 'necessity' doesn't even break the top ten compared to some of the craziness some posters believe.
:cool:

Since they seemed to have no imminent plans to upgrade the section west of i35 which meets up with the spur to the turnpike, highway 62 & highway 4 to interstate standards; I really had no expectation they would have been doing so east of SE 24th anytime soon.

Hwy 9 seems to be driven more by major safety issues than anything.

They should toll Highway 9 at each end of the widening project to pay for this. They can put the tolls on the I-35 on/off ramps and charge a flat fee no matter where you got onto Highway 9 at.

JTF, might be mo mony if the govt. just put toll booths at the ingress and egress of the subdivisions, collecting tolls from the sub-div drivers irrespective of where they are going. After all, they drive nearly everywhere.

JTF, might be mo mony if the govt. just put toll booths at the ingress and egress of the subdivisions, collecting tolls from the sub-div drivers irrespective of where they are going. After all, they drive nearly everywhere.

They will be putting little black boxes on your car to do that. In the mean time - just put some readers up that deduct the toll or take a picture of the tag and send the owner a bill.

http://www.okctalk.com/transportation/35004-toll-every-interstate-7.html#post700718

They should toll Highway 9 at each end of the widening project to pay for this. They can put the tolls on the I-35 on/off ramps and charge a flat fee no matter where you got onto Highway 9 at.

we don't need more tolls anywhere in Oklahoma. They can't manage the $$$ they have now, ...so why give them more?

we don't need more tolls anywhere in Oklahoma. They can't manage the $$$ they have now, ...so why give them more?

So you agree they shouldn't be spending more money to widen roads until they are more accountable from the funds they already have?

we don't need more tolls anywhere in Oklahoma. They can't manage the $$$ they have now, ...so why give them more?

My goodness, is the Turner Turnpike between OKC and Lawton still in poor condition?

So you agree they shouldn't be spending more money to widen roads until they are more accountable from the funds they already have?

JTF, ...I'm not going to raise their credit limit on their existing credit card. Nor would I ever give them an additional credit card. Manage the funds already in hand.

My goodness, is the Turner Turnpike between OKC and Lawton still in poor condition?

Do you know the history of this subject? ...Turner Turnpike? ...H E Bailey ? ...and now why we have an OTA, and the funds from Turner ( to pay for other roads ). A bait & switch.

In short, the original plan was to pay for the Turner, then do away w/ the toll once the project was complete & paid for.

Do you know the history of this subject? ...Turner Turnpike? ...H E Bailey ? ...and now why we have an OTA, and the funds from Turner ( to pay for other roads ). A bait & switch.

In short, the original plan was to pay for the Turner, then do away w/ the toll once the project was complete & paid for.

I'm pretty sure everyone is well aware of that...since every turnpike/toll road tends to start out that way.

My goodness, is the Turner Turnpike between OKC and Lawton still in poor condition?

That's not the Turner, it is the HE Bailey. And yes, it is being worked on, rather regularly. Other than the work near Chickasha though, it was fairly decent on some recent case trips to the Lawton/Altus area during the past few weeks.

Do you know the history of this subject? ...Turner Turnpike? ...H E Bailey ? ...and now why we have an OTA, and the funds from Turner ( to pay for other roads ). A bait & switch.

In short, the original plan was to pay for the Turner, then do away w/ the toll once the project was complete & paid for.

It wasn't bait and switch - the people of Oklahoma voted to roll all the turnpikes into one payment. Also, if the toll went away who pays for maintenance - which cost more than the original road did.

^ You having to address this illustrates why the states can not be left to their own devices. Many folks think that the cost of upkeep are optional luxuries once the road is built. How do you enforce federal standards if the state gov. refuses to comply?
Lock up the Governor for contempt?

^ You having to address this illustrates why the states can not be left to their own devices. Many folks think that the cost of upkeep are optional luxuries once the road is built. How do you enforce federal standards if the state gov. refuses to comply?
Lock up the Governor for contempt?

If the state fails to keep the roads up, then industry will pack it up and leave the state in droves. The bad thing is, people want to build build build...but not maintain once they are done.

I'm pretty sure everyone is well aware of that...since every turnpike/toll road tends to start out that way.

I'm w/ ya. Just in case there are those that may be new to Oklahoma or too young to know the history of this "money tree".

I'm w/ ya. Just in case there are those that may be new to Oklahoma or too young to know the history of this "money tree".

It isn't an Oklahoma thing. This is how every toll road started out.

It wasn't bait and switch - the people of Oklahoma voted to roll all the turnpikes into one payment. Also, if the toll went away who pays for maintenance - which cost more than the original road did.

JTF, either tell the entire story with the proper timelines of important events. The vote was well after the government machine already "addicted" to tolls.

The mainitenance was to be in the original state budget. The cost of the project ( once complete & paid in full ), at that time, the toll was to be removed. That was what was proposed to the people.

I don't know what to tell you, but the people of Oklahoma were not duped. They bought into highway construction in the 40's and 50's just like some people are still buying into it today (just look at this thread).

Here is the complete time-line.

https://www.pikepass.com/about/History.aspx



The Oklahoma Legislature passed HB 933 on May 7, 1953, created a new Oklahoma Turnpike Authority to replace the Authority created in 1947, providing for statewide representation on the new Turnpike Authority and establishing the basis for a State system of Turnpikes. HB 933 also authorized construction of the Northeastern Turnpike (this project was later named the Will Rogers Turnpike).

•
The Turner Turnpike was opened to traffic at 3:00 p.m., May 16, 1953.

•
The Oklahoma Legislature passed SB 454 on June 8, 1953 amending HB 933, which had passed just a month earlier, adding authorization to build a Turnpike from Oklahoma City to Wichita Falls, Texas (later named the H.E. Bailey Turnpike) and a Turnpike from Oklahoma City to Wichita, Kansas (the approximate present day alignment of Interstate 35 to Oklahoma City to Wichita).

•
All Turner Turnpike construction as certified as complete on November 14, 1953. A total of 91 contracts had been completed by 46 contractors at a total construction cost of $38.5 million.

•
On December 14, 1953, Referendum Petitions 105 and 106 were submitted to Oklahoma Attorney General Mac Q. Williamson by Muskogee Mayor Lyman B. Beard, for determination of the correct form of ballot titles for statewide votes on SB 454 and HB 933 as passed by the Oklahoma Legislature earlier in the year. On December 14, 1953, Attorney General Williamson submitted the ballot titles for State Questions 359 and 360 to Oklahoma Secretary of State John D. Conner. An election on the two state questions was set for January 26, 1954 by Governor Johnston Murray.

•
Voters approved both SB 454 and HB 933, including the new structure of the Turnpike Authority and the three new Turnpikes, by more than 40,000 votes on January 26, 1954.

I don't know what to tell you, but the people of Oklahoma were not duped. They bought into highway construction in the 40's and 50's just like some people are still buying into it today (just look at this thread).

Here is the complete time-line.

https://www.pikepass.com/about/History.aspx

The original proposal of SB 225 was to provide a "tool" to fund a new highway for ( 1 ) single project. This bond would be relieved and the Highway would be turned over to the State Highway Commision. Toll Free. That was the original intent.

The people did not vote on this project. The Senate did.

SB454 & HB 933 ( June 1953 ) established a Turnpike Authority & a new list of (4) projects. This was passed in the Senate & The House before any vote of the people. Only when the Attorney General stepped in, did they provide a state question to the people in 1/26/54. The structure of projects was still to have tolls in-place, then pay the bonds off. Then go toll-free.

The people did not know that they would have 100% toll roads when the voted in 54'. The wording on SQ was for the establishment of the new athority. Not to keep it 100% toll roads. ...So yes, the people were Duped through there belief that the bonds would be payed off and then have toll-free roads.

Do you know the history of this subject? ...Turner Turnpike? ...H E Bailey ? ...and now why we have an OTA, and the funds from Turner ( to pay for other roads ). A bait & switch.

In short, the original plan was to pay for the Turner, then do away w/ the toll once the project was complete & paid for.
That doesn't answer my question, unless you're implying money is being too spread out to adequately pay for the maintenance of the state's toll roads. So don't be surprised when some stretches of them may be in as bad shape as free highways.

^ You having to address this illustrates why the states can not be left to their own devices. Many folks think that the cost of upkeep are optional luxuries once the road is built. How do you enforce federal standards if the state gov. refuses to comply?
Lock up the Governor for contempt?
That won't happen. Oklahomans love Gov. Fallin too much to find her in contempt.

The next phases of Highway 9 expansion will begin later this decade.

https://www.odot.org/Highway9/

PS, shouldn’t this be moved to transportation thread?