You guys can spew as much numbers as you want, but at the end of the day, Texas has a bigger tax base and MUCH more people. Dallas alone has more people than the ENTIRE STATE OF OKLAHOMA. When OKC grows into a city of 7 million people, all of our interchanges and highways will be an envy of any other cities our size(currently). Our roads could be better and I agree with waiting until we have money to build roads and highways, with a FEW exceptions.

You guys can spew as much numbers as you want, but at the end of the day, Texas has a bigger tax base and MUCH more people. Dallas alone has more people than the ENTIRE STATE OF OKLAHOMA. When OKC grows into a city of 7 million people, all of our interchanges and highways will be an envy of any other cities our size. Our roads could be better and I agree with waiting until we have money to build roads and highways, with a FEW exceptions.

Ummm, all those 'spewed' numbers state exactly that Panda. IIRC you are the one that wants every highway interchange in Oklahoma to resemble the LBJ/75 intersection. Until the state of Oklahoma changes how roads are funded and built, we will continue to have rough pavement and crumbling bridges. This includes NOT building 4, 6, or 8 lane highways everywhere. Give me fewer, well built lane miles with funding left over for proper maintenance which in turn would permit modern interchanges to be built within our funding restraints as compared to Texas.

Ummm, all those 'spewed' numbers state exactly that Panda. IIRC you are the one that wants every highway interchange in Oklahoma to resemble the LBJ/75 intersection. Until the state of Oklahoma changes how roads are funded and built, we will continue to have rough pavement and crumbling bridges. This includes NOT building 4, 6, or 8 lane highways everywhere. Give me fewer, well built lane miles with funding left over for proper maintenance which in turn would permit modern interchanges to be built within our funding restraints as compared to Texas.What I want, and what can be done, are two different things partner. I also said there should be exceptions on not taking bonds and debt. Examples, relocating I-40:exception. . . my proposal of redoing I-35 to Norman:NO Exception, has to be paid for up front. . . I235/I44 junction: Exception THAT THING NEEDS REPLACED NOW!!!!. . . I35/240 junction: NO Exception. . . .

I still think highways need to widened as population and traffic counts go up. If it is determined in the future that I35 should be widened to 10 lanes, great, as long as traffic counts support it and the widening is paid upfront, unless we're experiencing 24/7 nightmare traffic and I'm not just talking about 3 rush hours in the evening.

Also, I'm just trying to simplify it. Not trying to put anyone down or anything.

Yeah, based on your reply here, I think we are in complete agreement. Smart[er] spending. I like it.


The decision to build a highway should be a very careful one. They aren't just going to cost us hundreds of millions of dollars today, but they will continue to cost us billions over their lifetime. The aggregate of making poor, short-term gain decisions lands us in a position where we are over-leveraged with debt.

I'd rather see and would support politically, a pay-as-you-go model with a focus on spending money where revenues are already coming up in a sustainable way. i.e., population (residential and/or business) is densifying and there is a diversification of revenues (more than a single industry).

Expenditures should be focused on enhancing and nurturing these environments. Not trying to create them out of thin air.

Again, I think we are all just saying about the same thing.

Excellent points.

Pay as you go is usually preferable, but there are times when public debt is actually "smart" for large projects. If bonds are issued when interest rates are as low as they are now, a well designed and built road could cost less in the long run due to lower maintenance and longer service life. I think the 235/44 interchange might be a good example where getting the project done as soon as possible would pay long term dividends. Piecemealing the project doesn't really have many positives other than being able to claim it was done with "no debt".

Yeah, based on your reply here, I think we are in complete agreement. Smart[er] spending. I like it.

ou84, I agree, debt isn't evil. But one look at the cash vs debt spending by TxDOT and it is clear to see, they buy very little with cash. Again, this has worked the last decade for the them. But it requires growth and the continuation of it. I've yet to see a city, state, or nation in the world that was able to just keep on growing, no matter what. Prudence and wisdom tells us that if our spending is limited to a debt + growth model, we are begging for difficult shortfalls in the future.

I'd rather see and would support politically, a pay-as-you-go model with a focus on spending money where revenues are already coming up in a sustainable way. i.e., population (residential and/or business) is densifying and there is a diversification of revenues (more than a single industry).



Boom.

I think the Texas model of roads is appealing given the deplorable state of our roads in comparison. But the schemes to finance them down there are really not sustainable in any way. I think they are really going to get bit in the butt in about 15-20 years.

Let's not even start on the very shady deals Texas has made with international companies like Cintra to operate toll roads.

ou84, I agree, debt isn't evil. But one look at the cash vs debt spending by TxDOT and it is clear to see, they buy very little with cash. Again, this has worked the last decade for the them. But it requires growth and the continuation of it. I've yet to see a city, state, or nation in the world that was able to just keep on growing, no matter what. Prudence and wisdom tells us that if our spending is limited to a debt + growth model, we are begging for difficult shortfalls in the future.

I'd rather see and would support politically, a pay-as-you-go model with a focus on spending money where revenues are already coming up in a sustainable way. i.e., population (residential and/or business) is densifying and there is a diversification of revenues (more than a single industry).

Expenditures should be focused on enhancing and nurturing these environments. Not trying to create them out of thin air.

Again, I think we are all just saying about the same thing.
I think most of us are saying pretty much the same thing in that we need better funding and higher building standards from the very start. We need better leadership at several levels.
When we take on new debt we shouldn’t over extend our self’s…. but the investment we make in infrastructure if done right goes a long way in insuring future growth.


I really think we could learn a lot from the way both Texas & Kansas have historically managed their states.
The economies are fairly similar to ours.

Texas has a huge tax base advantage in there oil money… But having lived in Kansas it seemed like they did better at managing their states resources.

The fact that Texas has no state income tax is a huge positive for their growth rates. Rather their total tax burden is higher or not is almost irrelevant to outside corporations when they relocate from states with high income taxes. Having personaly known people who were involved in the negation process of very large relocations to Texas, no state income tax makes Texas a very easy selling point to high end decision makers. Texas can also sell a great track record of helping rather than hindering economic development like we did when GM opened its OKC plant... I don’t think GM management ever forgot how they were treated in Oklahoma.

The bottom line is that we need more capable leaders who have a strong business sense a vision to create state wide growth.

Boom.

I think the Texas model of roads is appealing given the deplorable state of our roads in comparison. But the schemes to finance them down there are really not sustainable in any way. I think they are really going to get bit in the butt in about 15-20 years. Let's not even start on the very shady deals Texas has made with international companies like Cintra to operate toll roads.

I strongly disagree!

As long as Texas doesn’t become over extended and there is no indication that they will Texas will have no problem funding their highways and much more in 20 + years due to a huge amount of new oil & NG that will be produced in Texas.

I don’t think very many Oklahomas and others grasp the sheer scale of this new Texas oil & ng wealth and what it will bring to Texas even at significantly lower prices.

Texas’ oil production has jumped by 71 percent in the last two years.


Oil and gas deposits in the state’s rainy day fund were almost $1.9 billion for fiscal year 2013 that began Sept. 1 — representing almost one-fourth of the fund’s $8 billion. They’re estimated to be $1.7 billion in fiscal 2014 and $1.8 billion 2015.

the Eagle Ford’s production is expected to last a couple of decades more, he said. “And remember that the way technology evolves, the life of the field could extend longer than originally anticipated.”

Fuel Fix » Oil?s new reign in Texas draws comparisons to the Kingdom (http://fuelfix.com/blog/2013/02/17/oil%E2%80%99s-new-reign-in-texas-draws-comparisons-to-the-kingdom/)

Texas’ oil production has jumped by 71 percent in the last two years.


Oil and gas deposits in the state’s rainy day fund were almost $1.9 billion for fiscal year 2013 that began Sept. 1 — representing almost one-fourth of the fund’s $8 billion. They’re estimated to be $1.7 billion in fiscal 2014 and $1.8 billion 2015.

the Eagle Ford’s production is expected to last a couple of decades more, he said. “And remember that the way technology evolves, the life of the field could extend longer than originally anticipated.”

Fuel Fix » Oil?s new reign in Texas draws comparisons to the Kingdom (http://fuelfix.com/blog/2013/02/17/oil%E2%80%99s-new-reign-in-texas-draws-comparisons-to-the-kingdom/)

ou48A, does the Mississippi Lime formation potentially hold anything close to that kind of windfall for Oklahoma?

ou48A, does the Mississippi Lime formation potentially hold anything close to that kind of windfall for Oklahoma?


Although it will help from everything I have seen the Oklahoma Mississippi Lime side will not give our state anything close to the same windfall that Texas will have.

Probably the biggest hot crude oil play we have is in south central Oklahoma
It’s called the South Central Oklahoma Oil Play (SCOOP). It’s a big deal for us and it will make a lot of people wealthy. But it and the other new oil & NG plays in Oklahoma by a factor of many times won’t come close to matching the new production occurring in Texas.

Even if our new production revenue for our state won’t match what Texas has this new oil & NG revenue is still a very big deal for Oklahoma….But as we know it won’t last forever.


I would very much like to see part of this new oil & NG wealth used to further endow our 2 main universities and used so that they can both make our state’s economy more competitive, more diversified and be engines for high end job growth. Building up our intellectual capitol assets is the best way to keep us prosperous for generations to come.

Another idea would be to establish an oil and NG Legacy Fund similar to what North Dakota, Alaska, and Texas have.
In my very strong opinion it would be criminal for our states leaders to not use this boom revenue in ways that will help us for many generations to come.

Sorry for the rant, but I think this stuff is important.:o

Even if our new production revenue for our state won’t match what Texas has this new oil & NG revenue is still a very big deal for Oklahoma….But as we know it won’t last forever.


I would very much like to see part of this new oil & NG wealth used to further endow our 2 main universities and used so that they can both make our state’s economy more competitive, more diversified and be engines for high end job growth. Building up our intellectual capitol assets is the best way to keep us prosperous for generations to come.

Another idea would be to establish an oil and NG Legacy Fund similar to what North Dakota, Alaska, and Texas have.
In my very strong opinion it would be criminal for our states leaders to not use this boom revenue in ways that will help us for many generations to come.

Sorry for the rant, but I think this stuff is important.:o

I love the idea of an endowment or legacy fund with the revenue. Similar to the tobacco trust possibly. Just something to ensure that our brilliant leadership doesn't get to piss it all away.

I strongly disagree!

As long as Texas doesn’t become over extended and there is no indication that they will Texas will have no problem funding their highways and much more in 20 + years due to a huge amount of new oil & NG that will be produced in Texas.

I don’t think very many Oklahomas and others grasp the sheer scale of this new Texas oil & ng wealth and what it will bring to Texas even at significantly lower prices.

I don't disagree with you. But a lot of things can happen in the future. Its pretty disingenuous to construct (with debt) billions of dollars in road projects while incurring almost as much in future maintenance liabilities based on the assumption that we have lots of oil and that means everything will be sunshine and rainbows in the future. Its especially dishonest coming from ardent fiscal conservatives who will not show anywhere near the same appetite for "creative financing" for education, heath care, etc.

I don't disagree with you. But a lot of things can happen in the future. Its pretty disingenuous to construct (with debt) billions of dollars in road projects while incurring almost as much in future maintenance liabilities based on the assumption that we have lots of oil and that means everything will be sunshine and rainbows in the future. Its especially dishonest coming from ardent fiscal conservatives who will not show anywhere near the same appetite for "creative financing" for education, heath care, etc.

It not even close to dishonest……
They have basically been funding many of their street and highways projects like this since WWII that I'm aware of.
Not living in fear while practicing reasonable fiduciary responsibility has worked very well in Texas for many decades. They have decade’s long growth as evidence of a job well done.

In the event of a down turn they have established a state oil & NG fund that might act somewhat like a rainy-day fund and help bridge funding gaps.

I love the idea of an endowment or legacy fund with the revenue. Similar to the tobacco trust possibly. Just something to ensure that our brilliant leadership doesn't get to piss it all away.


That’s the work of quality leadership with a vision that we need more of in our state.

This is something else Texas does better.
We need a similar fund and it would not need to be near as big to be just as effective for Oklahoma.
Responsible management like this is what has helped Texas become so prosperous.

http://www.pionline.com/article/20130417/DAILYREG/130419896

University of Texas System's endowment assets reached a new peak of $21.7 billion as of Feb. 28, halfway through its fiscal year. The prior apex was $20.6 billion as of Aug. 31, 2012

There's a whole lot of stuff we could spend our money on that would help this state more than additional highways. Our state legislators should spend their time passing thoughtful laws that will help our state prosper rather than laws restricting aborted fetuses in Happy Meals and other crazy things.

Things aren't as rosy at TXDot as many would have you believe. Keep borrowing money to build stuff, and at some point you'll have to pay the bills.

TxDOT brass says funding crisis is near | San Marcos Mercury | Local News from San Marcos and Hays County, Texas (http://smmercury.com/2013/02/05/txdot-brass-says-funding-crisis-is-near/)

TxDOT Director Asks for Stable Highway Funding System (http://www.texasobserver.org/txdot-needs-stable-money/)

Things aren't as rosy at TXDot as many would have you believe. Keep borrowing money to build stuff, and at some point you'll have to pay the bills.

TxDOT brass says funding crisis is near | San Marcos Mercury | Local News from San Marcos and Hays County, Texas (http://smmercury.com/2013/02/05/txdot-brass-says-funding-crisis-is-near/)

TxDOT Director Asks for Stable Highway Funding System (http://www.texasobserver.org/txdot-needs-stable-money/)


That says that Texas will need “$4 billion a year in additional funding”
With oil production rates increasing by about 80% just in the past 2 years and they will keep increasing for many more years to come, for Texas it will only be a matter of shifting the money to where it’s needed.
But regardless, Texas has done a much better job of building its highways than Oklahoma has.

Things aren't as rosy at TXDot as many would have you believe. Keep borrowing money to build stuff, and at some point you'll have to pay the bills.

TxDOT brass says funding crisis is near | San Marcos Mercury | Local News from San Marcos and Hays County, Texas (http://smmercury.com/2013/02/05/txdot-brass-says-funding-crisis-is-near/)

TxDOT Director Asks for Stable Highway Funding System (http://www.texasobserver.org/txdot-needs-stable-money/)

Not to LOL - but LOL. I guess it goes to show that anyone can look prosperous when they are living on debt. Now the big question is, what happened to the money from all the growth the new freeways were supposed to generate?

Not to LOL - but LOL. I guess it goes to show that anyone can look prosperous when they are living on debt. Now the big question is, what happened to the money from all the growth the new freeways were supposed to generate?

If you read everything that was posted recently, we all came to the consensus that selling bonds and building on debt isn't the ideal way to go, far from it, but we do still need roads and we need to do a better job on them and that Oklahoma needs to look at ways to accomplish that goal. We don't need to fund them the same way Texas does, but we certainly need to change what we're currently doing.

Does that also mean we can all agree the growth model doesn't work?

More than a decade ago, lawmakers paved the way for an era of “innovative financing” at TxDOT ...

That sounds like a red flag

When I read that I thought to myself - what is so innovative about debt? Of every way there is to pay for something we have debt down to a science. We aren't so good about paying it off or what we do once we max it out by we can accumulate it the way squirrels collect acorns.

When I read that I thought to myself - what is so innovative about debt? Of every way there is to pay for something we have debt down to a science. We aren't so good about paying it off or what we do once we max it out by we can accumulate it the way squirrels collect acorns.

The innovation is often getting around the safeguards in the system which were in place to protect the people who have to pay the bill and/or take risk on the project(s)

The innovation is often getting around the safeguards in the system which were in place to protect the people who have to pay the bill and/or take risk on the project(s)

So true.

The tornado has caused a lot of congestion on I-35 and is delaying the response times according to officials.
A new I-35 by pass would be a great help right now.

The tornado has caused a lot of congestion on I-35 and is delaying the response times according to officials.
A new I-35 by pass would be a great help right now.

people slowing down for no reason what so ever, except to peer at the devastation is the cause of the congestion. a better solution is for humans to evolve past the point where car wrecks and disaster areas become a form of entertainment

people slowing down for no reason what so ever, except to peer at the devastation is the cause of the congestion. a better solution is for humans to evolve past the point where car wrecks and disaster areas become a form of entertainment

You will never change basic human nature… and it’s basically useless to even try or to even think about.

But a lot of the slowdown is due to heavy equipment that must make its way through the blocked exits and though the congestion that backs up from other slow moving heavy equipment.

The tornado has caused a lot of congestion on I-35 and is delaying the response times according to officials.
A new I-35 by pass would be a great help right now.As the city grows, I'm sure we'll build a bypass at some point.

As the city grows, I'm sure we'll build a bypass at some point.


According to the experts who study this issue we will need an I-35 by pass around the east sides of the metro in a few years anyway. The east side of metro area has grown but this would be a great route for heavy trucks others that are just driving though the city. This would offer a degree of relive for all of I-35 in the OKC metro and an alternative route in the event of a problem on I-35.

I agree, hopefully something will be done soon.

The tornado has caused a lot of congestion on I-35 and is delaying the response times according to officials.
A new I-35 by pass would be a great help right now.

It was the same back in 1999. It also stopped up I-40 then as the tornado actually turned north after leaving Moore and struck Midwest City.

I wonder if all of this recent congestion from the storms will prompt a new I-35 by pass???? lol

Likely won't though ;P

I wonder if all of this recent congestion from the storms will prompt a new I-35 by pass???? lol

Likely won't though ;P

UHHH, no.

The tornado has caused a lot of congestion on I-35 and is delaying the response times according to officials.
A new I-35 by pass would be a great help right now.

I think its a bit of an overreaction to build something that you might potentially need once every 2 to 5 years. What we need is people not trying to outrun storms en masse.

I think its a bit of an overreaction to build something that you might potentially need once every 2 to 5 years. What we need is people not trying to outrun storms en masse.

It’s not an overreaction because it’s basically already needed or soon will be needed on an everyday basses.

It’s not an overreaction because it’s basically already needed or soon will be needed on an everyday basses.

Or people could stay in safer places like their homes or work rather than trying to outrun an unpredictable storm?

Or people could stay in safer places like their homes or work rather than trying to outrun an unpredictable storm?
Doing nothing doesn’t help an everyday situation that’s increasingly congested, everyday.

Doing nothing doesn’t help an everyday situation that’s increasingly congested, everyday.

Could argue that they need to launch the commuter rail from Norman to Downtown today then. BNSF, whom I believe owns the line that Amtrak uses, does commuter rail in Chicago so they could easily move in and offer it here I would think. Though I'm not sure how many would use it today without a strong mass transit system in place.

Who would pay for this new freeway?

A couple of random thoughts that occurred to me based on comments in this and other threads. People who drive pay state and federal fuel taxes. People who walk on sidewalks and bike paths don't pay bike path use taxes and sidewalk use taxes. Maybe we should tax tennis shoes and bike tires or build toll sidewalks and toll bikepaths to finance them so the people who don't use them aren't paying for them.

That said, I wish we had sidewalks up and down Council road. There is a steady stream of people and well worn paths in the grass and dirt from Reno north to Bethany. I watch them slogging through that grass and sometimes mud on a daily basis, far more than the foot traffic I see on Broadway for instance, a place where I have some occasional but repeat business. But people walk Council anyway so there's that. (I've done it myself but it's not part of my regular routine.)

Could argue that they need to launch the commuter rail from Norman to Downtown today then. BNSF, whom I believe owns the line that Amtrak uses, does commuter rail in Chicago so they could easily move in and offer it here I would think. Though I'm not sure how many would use it today without a strong mass transit system in place.


I support the idea of OKC metro commuter rail ASAP and a better mass transit system but they have their limits.
As our area grows, more metro area highways are needed. One of the worst causes of wasted fuel and pollution come from vehicles that are idling, stopping, and staring in congestion. The congestion also cuts into our areas prosperity. As much as we can stay ahead of the congestion problem, it will help our quality of life.

A couple of random thoughts that occurred to me based on comments in this and other threads. People who drive pay state and federal fuel taxes. People who walk on sidewalks and bike paths don't pay bike path use taxes and sidewalk use taxes. Maybe we should tax tennis shoes and bike tires or build toll sidewalks and toll bikepaths to finance them so the people who don't use them aren't paying for them.



Prepare to be blasted for your logical thoughts

The parking meter was invented here. Maybe we could make them triple use, plug them if you park, walk or bike past one.

The parking meter was invented here. Maybe we could make them triple use, plug them if you park, walk or bike past one.

Your not actually using them if you walk or bike past them

No. Triple use. With motion detectors and cameras. Three coin slots. Or sell them a Bikepass or a Pedpass that dings their credit card each time they walk by or bike past one. Problem solved. We can afford all the sidewalks and bike paths that the people who use them want to pay for.

I'll be glad to pay a shoe and bicycle tire tax when the gasoline tax fully funds all things automobile related.

I support the idea of OKC metro commuter rail ASAP and a better mass transit system but they have their limits.
As our area grows, more metro area highways are needed. One of the worst causes of wasted fuel and pollution come from vehicles that are idling, stopping, and staring in congestion. The congestion also cuts into our areas prosperity. As much as we can stay ahead of the congestion problem, it will help our quality of life.

We don't have a traffic congestion problem. At all. We don't need to build freeways so you can evacuate in 30 minutes or less in case the aliens from Independence Day attack. That's what you're pushing for.

It’s not an overreaction because it’s basically already needed or soon will be needed on an everyday basses.I agree or they should just widen I-35 and build a light-rail joint project with as well.

No. Triple use. With motion detectors and cameras. Three coin slots. Or sell them a Bikepass or a Pedpass that dings their credit card each time they walk by or bike past one. Problem solved. We can afford all the sidewalks and bike paths that the people who use them want to pay for.

I'd happily pay a sidewalk tax that charges me for maintenance based on how much I use them. Of course, it's gonna be about 2 cents a year, given how little damage a person walking on concrete causes.

It’s not an overreaction because it’s basically already needed or soon will be needed on an everyday basses.

Everyday basses?

http://www.projectsandhobbies.com/bluegr3.jpg

?

We don't have a traffic congestion problem. At all. We don't need to build freeways so you can evacuate in 30 minutes or less in case the aliens from Independence Day attack. That's what you're pushing for.

We DO have traffic congestion problems in the Norman area and on I-35 everday... it’s going to get a lot worse if we do nothing.
Doing nothing is unacceptable.

I'll be glad to pay a shoe and bicycle tire tax when the gasoline tax fully funds all things automobile related.

Ah...you're not against subsidy except when it doesn't agree with your goals, then it's fine. Got it.

We DO have traffic congestion problems in the Norman area and on I-35 everday... it’s going to get a lot worse if we do nothing.
Doing nothing is unacceptable.

I drive I-35 all the time during rush hour. No congestion problems.

I don't know why you guys continue to argue with these trolls. They are never going to agree and will continue to propose things that aren't logical.

Everyday basses?

http://www.projectsandhobbies.com/bluegr3.jpg

?

Intermission:

9v7YHqRlLvo

of course, the logical basis (biases?) of the argument, regarding "basses" could have been a typo . . .

m80jt6bm6ZA

(carry on . . . but how about no more troll roads . . . OK? No. Seriously. =)

What goals are you talking about? Streets are invention of necessity. It is important that people be able to get from one property to another for the purpose of conducting business, buying goods and services, and utilizing public amenities. Before the invention of the car, we didn't need to have this funding discussion. People who own cars for some reason think that those who don't own cars, deserve the road less. Like traveling 3mph is less worthy of the space. The funding challenge, the one you want to pretend you care about for the sake of this petty discussion, was never an issue before people chose to take up about 20 sq ft. of space and add 1800lbs to their method.

So starting at zero is allowing anyone to get where they need to go with exactly what everyone else has -- feet. Anything beyond that, once it penalizes that function, should be considered for 'impact' fees. No different than blocking the road to move a house. A vehicle demands a disproportionate amount of space and design than the natural, original space needed to provide the free exercise of citizens within a city.

Try again.

You have certainly hit on the point, entitlement. Some people think they are entitled to have the government provide them with paved sidewalks and bike paths at some person's expense. (Where OKC can, they put that entirely on the developer, or redeveloper in the case of properties redeveloped without existing sidewalks. My comment was in part due to someone upthread who compared the government building a new road to the government building new sidewalks with the same money, arguing for the latter instead of the former.)

But I see some of this is covered upthread anyway.
Good point, but we still need the money so maybe we end up with both. I did see where Seattle was proposing a $25 fee when you buy a bike to support the cost of bicycle related infrastructure.

I noticed you said "feet". Are you on the fence on paved bike paths or are you entitled to have those free too?

I've noticed some people feel entitled to have the government build them roads and highways as well.

I said that.(Or agreed) Double standard for some.