Title 69, Section 1705e contains 35 locations where the OTA is allowed to build if you believe we still have a representative democracy and a judicial system willing to uphold legislative intent
"Does the legislature even control the OTA anymore? Did they EVER?"
It is possible that prior to Oklahomans shooting themselves in their own political foot through the establishment of term limits that there was some control over the Oklahoma Transportation Commission (OTC), Oklahoma Department of Transportation (ODOT), and the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority (OTA). As I was leaving the capitol building with State Representative Richard Morrissette in 2012 after a contentious legislatively directed Eastern Flyer Passenger Rail Development Task Force meeting, he pointed in the direction of the ODOT building. He said, "There is the power in state government. Not here."
As Vice Chairman of the Eastern Flyer Task Force, I fought a losing battle with appointed state bureaucrats who didn't want to see a competitive mode of transportation established between Oklahoma City and Tulsa - really anywhere in the state. For anyone who bothered to attend the meetings, ODOT's obstruction was evident. So here we sit today in 2024 and nothing is being done to meet legislative intent within the Oklahoma Tourism and Passenger Rail Act of 1996 §66-321 through §66-325:
Section 322 - Purpose "The purpose of the Oklahoma Tourism and Passenger Rail Act shall be to do all things necessary to restore passenger rail service to the state, to enhance the state's position as a tourist destination site and to improve the quality of life for residents of this state by offering an alternative mode of intrastate and interstate travel."
Section 323 - Definitions "6. "Passenger rail service" shall mean interstate or intrastate passenger rail service, including but not limited to a route linking stations in Oklahoma and Tulsa Counties with other primary points in the national railroad passenger system."
According to the "not feasible" and other notes by OTA, it seems that the Gilcrease and the Norman turnpikes are just about the last (currently identified/*approved*) hurrahs for OTA, aside from interchanges. Sure makes me think that their determination for the Norman pikes will be more furious than usual. And it's impossible to believe that if they do clean up their location authorizations, that there aren't more pikes being cooked up for future "authorization." No way that as a *wholly-owned subsidiary* of Oklahoma's construction/real estate/banking industry that this cash-cow will ever run dry.
As I told Kelly, they just change around authorizations and use whatever fits what they want to accomplish at the time. (20) was authorized in 1987 by HB 1259 and (28) was authorized in 1993 by HB 1556. According to their Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports from 1998-2000, the description of the H.E. Bailey Spur says it was "authorized by legislation in 1987". That would make it part of (20). Starting with the 2021 report, it was just lumped in the H.E. Bailey turnpike description.
"Does the legislature even control the OTA anymore? Did they EVER?"
It is possible that prior to Oklahomans shooting themselves in their own political foot through the establishment of term limits that there was some control over the Oklahoma Transportation Commission (OTC), Oklahoma Department of Transportation (ODOT), and the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority (OTA). As I was leaving the capitol building with State Representative Richard Morrissette in 2012 after a contentious legislatively directed Eastern Flyer Passenger Rail Development Task Force meeting, he pointed in the direction of the ODOT building. He said, "There is the power in state government. Not here."
As Vice Chairman of the Eastern Flyer Task Force, I fought a losing battle with appointed state bureaucrats who didn't want to see a competitive mode of transportation established between Oklahoma City and Tulsa - really anywhere in the state. For anyone who bothered to attend the meetings, ODOT's obstruction was evident. So here we sit today in 2024 and nothing is being done to meet legislative intent within the Oklahoma Tourism and Passenger Rail Act of 1996 §66-321 through §66-325:
Section 322 - Purpose "The purpose of the Oklahoma Tourism and Passenger Rail Act shall be to do all things necessary to restore passenger rail service to the state, to enhance the state's position as a tourist destination site and to improve the quality of life for residents of this state by offering an alternative mode of intrastate and interstate travel."
Section 323 - Definitions "6. "Passenger rail service" shall mean interstate or intrastate passenger rail service, including but not limited to a route linking stations in Oklahoma and Tulsa Counties with other primary points in the national railroad passenger system."
According to the "not feasible" and other notes by OTA, it seems that the Gilcrease and the Norman turnpikes are just about the last (currently identified/*approved*) hurrahs for OTA, aside from interchanges. Sure makes me think that their determination for the Norman pikes will be more furious than usual. And it's impossible to believe that if they do clean up their location authorizations, that there aren't more pikes being cooked up for future "authorization." No way that as a *wholly-owned subsidiary* of Oklahoma's construction/real estate/banking industry that this cash-cow will ever run dry.
OTA is an example of government mismanagement.
As I told Kelly, they just change around authorizations and use whatever fits what they want to accomplish at the time. (20) was authorized in 1987 by HB 1259 and (28) was authorized in 1993 by HB 1556. According to their Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports from 1998-2000, the description of the H.E. Bailey Spur says it was "authorized by legislation in 1987". That would make it part of (20). Starting with the 2021 report, it was just lumped in the H.E. Bailey turnpike description.
They write and rewrite their own story to fit whatever narrative is most beneficial to them at the time. It's maddening.