This podcast (Episode 16) was from Monday April 20th.
Our legislature is a mess, and I don’t know how to fix it.
On this week’s Right-of-Way Report, we broke down what actually happened to SB80 as it moved through the Commerce and Economic Development Oversight Committee on Thursday, April 16. Just a week earlier, the bill’s original language had already taken a beating from a trio of legislators more focused on whether it “helped the state” than whether it protected Oklahomans. If you haven’t watched that hearing, go back and do it—it sets the stage for everything that followed this week.
Then came the latest twist: an unfriendly, full rewrite filed by Committee Chairman Rep. Brian Hill just 17 minutes before SB80 was heard.
This discussion of the bill and its amendments lasted less than two-minutes, which was mind blowing since the amendment was a complete deletion of the original language.
Rep. Staires explained the amendment as “SB80 is a clean-up bill, simply removing a handful of turnpikes that have been on the books for the last 30, 40, 50 years, that have been deemed unnecessary at this time.”
Then Chairman Rep. Brian Hill asked Rep. Staires “Would you agree that this bill does not make anyone completely happy but does make sure that everyone did get something, thus a good consensus was made.”
Rep. Staires replied, “Yes, this bill has gone through a number of revisions getting to where we are today and those revisions have been painful, but everybody is at a spot where they are going ‘this is a very good step forward’ and we’ll take it from here.”
This is a lie. The rewrite of the bill was egregious in many regards, but the citizens got the shortest end of the stick possible when they stripped the language that would sunset the location authorizations after 5 years if design contracts had not been signed.
In addition to removing the sunset language, they struck out a segment of Section 1705f that constrained the OTA to building any part of the outer loop. This strike out is one of the only citizen protective statements in the entire turnpike statute because it requires the OTA to build the outer loop (Location Authorization #20) under one bond indenture and issue - a clause put in by Henry Bellmon in the late 80s.
The OTA struck the following language from Title 69, Section 1705f:
That single clause was the foundation of our argument in the OTA’s 2022 Bond Validation Case (O-120619): the East-West Connector could not be legally built on its own. Yet when we raised this point and showed all the evidence that the legislative intent was clear, the judiciary bent over backwards to protect the OTA instead of enforcing the legislature’s plain words.
“(f) To issue turnpike revenue bonds of the Authority, payable solely from revenues, including the revenues accruing to the trust fund created by Sections 1701 through 1734 of this title, for the purpose of paying all or any part of the cost of any one or more turnpike projects. Provided that any bonds issued for the construction of the proposed turnpike referred to in subparagraphs (10), (20), (21) and (22) of paragraph (e) of this section shall be issued as one issue for all four of the proposed turnpikes and shall be financed, constructed and operated under one bond indenture.”
The second sentence of § 1705(f) strictly limits the OTA’s bonding and building authority in the case of the four turnpikes (part of the Chickasaw (10), part of the Cherokee (22), part of the Creek (21), and part of the Oklahoma City Outer Loop (20)) enumerated in 69 O.S. § 1705(e).
The Supreme Court dissenting minority (3 intellectually honest justices), agreed with our interpretation of the legislative intent - that the OTA could NOT get additional bonds to build the roadway. They had the following to say about the clause that ever since 1987, the OTA has been TRYING to get out of statute.
Rep. Hill and Rep. Staires were used as the OTA’s useful idiots to jam this amendment through and they seemingly legitimately thought it was “all good.”
Interestingly enough, the useful legislative idiots also allowed certain location authorizations to stay in statute. Specifically, they allowed #14, #27, #29 and #30 to stay, split #10 out into separate locations (because they are), even though the OTA has repeatedly stated that those specific authorizations are “infeasible.”
In addition, he allowed them to add a turnpike authorization that is similar to #27, but includes a bridge crossing the Red River between Hugo, Oklahoma and the Oklahoma-Arkansas border.
WOWSERS! Talk about a meaty amendment for the bad guys.
These so-called “compromises”—or more accurately, capitulations to the dark side—didn’t come out of nowhere. They were born in last week’s Transportation Committee hearing, where Reps. Cantrell, Dempsey, and Grego openly questioned why Oklahoma should remove decades-old, 60-year-old turnpike location authorizations from statute at all.
If you didn’t catch that transportation committee debate, it’s worth going back and listening. The questions and framing from those Representatives made it abundantly clear who—and what—they’re really trying to protect.
But, less than two minutes to talk about a major amendment?
How many of those Representatives actually READ AND UNDERSTOOD THE AMENDMENT filed 17 minutes before the committee meeting started?
NONE.
Watch how fast Chairman Hill asks for further questions, then, waits less than a second, then asks for a Do Pass motion and a second, which happens in LESS THAN 5 SECONDS!!!!!!
And then, without taking a breath, asks for discussion or debate and then a vote in LESS THAN 5 SECONDS!!!!!!
Less than 30 minutes AFTER the amendment was filed, a vote was taken to approve the completely rewritten bill, 11-0
They rammed that amendment through the same way the OTA builds turnpikes—fast, aggressive, and with zero regard for the people in the way.
Not like any of the Representatives had read or understood the amendment anyway.
What ever happened to the 24 hour rule, where any changes to a bill had to be out for review for at least twenty four hours prior to any sort of vote? Is that not a real thing anymore?
When I asked Rep. Staires about why he allowed this amendment to go through not only which such awful language, but with so little time for the committee members to truly understand what was going on and with less than 2 minutes of discussion about the amendment in committee, he replied,
“It was this or a dead bill. There are more players involved in the legislative process than just you and the OTA. The final amendments didn’t come from the OTA, they came from Chairman Hill. Senator Standridge worked out the language with him without the OTA in the room. This is politics. There are bills that get run and bills that get passed. This just got passed 9-0 and will get passed off the floor. Last week this bill was dead because Chairman Hill refused to hear it. You just got 10 of the 18 turnpikes you wanted taken out of statute. You can be grateful [for] that or you can be exceptionally disappointed in what you didn’t get.” - Rep. Clay Staires, text, April 16
Dude.
You just don’t get it.
I’d rather a dead bill than a bad bill.
You clearly don’t understand the language and the ramifications of what you just did.
First of all, regarding the statement that I “just got 10 of the 18 turnpikes [I] wanted taken out of statute.”
This is completely a moot point because there is no sunset language anymore and ALL of these “turnpikes” were listed as infeasible by the OTA. It doesn’t matter if they stay or if they go if the sunset language provision is stripped.
In addition, the majority of what “I got” was removal of tollgates or interchanges, and while I don’t have a legal ruling whether or not tollgate/interchange locations are necessary in statute, in practice, it doesn’t seem to matter. The OTA builds them wherever they want.
Once the OTA builds a road, that is supposedly authorized, they do whatever they want on the road. But apparently over the years, legislators didn’t really understand that point and continued to put various interchanges and on-off ramp locations in statute.
What I’m saying is that this amendment was POSTURING to the citizens, in the hopes that we plebes would think that the legislators were doing something noble.
But they weren’t.
The location authorizations that were stricken in this amendment included 7 new turnpikes or extensions of existing turnpikes and 10 interchanges, on-off ramps or tollgates, for a total of 17 of the existing 35 location authorizations to be removed. You can see the location of the turnpikes on the map above. The tollgates are not shown.
#7 Extension of the Muskogee Turnpike
#8 A bunch of tollgates on the Turner
#9 A tollgate on the Will Rogers
#11 A turnpike in the vicinity of Ponca City
#12 OKC Toll expressway system
#13 A turnpike running the length of the state from Kansas to Texas within 30 miles of the Arkansas border
#15 A turnpike near Watonga
#16 A tollgate on Will Rogers
#17 A tollgate on the Muskogee Turnpike
#18 A tollgate on the Turner Turnpike
#19 A tollgate on the Muskogee Turnpike
#24 An extension of the Muskogee Turnpike
#25 A turnpike NW of Tulsa
#26 An interchange on the Indian Nation Turnpike
#31 An on-off ramp near Fletcher on I-44 and State Highway 277
#33 An exit ramp on eastbound lane of Turner Turnpike
#34 An on-off ramp on the Cimarron Turnpike.
Should I feel happy about this? I don’t think so.
Let’s be clear—this wasn’t compromise. It was capitulation.
A bill that once had meaningful guardrails was stripped down, rewritten, and pushed through so quickly that even the people voting on it couldn’t possibly have understood what they were approving. And somehow, we’re supposed to be grateful for what’s left?
No.
A bad bill doesn’t become good just because parts of it look familiar. And removing language that actually constrained the OTA while leaving behind meaningless “wins” for optics isn’t progress—it’s posturing.
If this is what “getting something done” looks like at the Capitol, then we should all be paying very close attention.
Because today it’s SB80. Tomorrow it’s something else.
And the only thing moving faster than these bills is the erosion of accountability.
