Access Oklahoma Turnpike Projects

[David]

Without cross pledging the OTA would collapse. The Kilpatrick, Creek and Turner are the only turnpike roads that pay for themselves. Every other toll road in OK is heavily in the red.
For the OTA to survive it has to get new bonds issued to help cover the old debt. It amazes me that our legislature has allowed them to run uncontrolled for 70 years. And now they are asking for 8-10 BILLION more dollars to build more roads that history has shown won't pay for themselves. We will continue to have rate hikes to support this Ponzi scheme until the state legislature has the balls to get them under control. No other state entity could spend 8 BILLION dollars without legislative approval.

So the turnpikes that pay for themselves are basically the major turnpikes in the OKC and Tulsa metros? Good thing that the significant majority of the new turnpike cost looks to be spend on new highways in those same two metros, I don't think it's safe to assume that those new turnpikes are going to be as much of a money black hole as the rest of the system.

[Jeremy Martin]

The OTA has built and manages 13 turnpikes. 3 of them pay for all 13. That is a less than 25% success rate. If I could bet on this I know where I would place my money.
The OTA is notoriously bad at traffic and review projections. The Cherokee Nation turnpike was opened 33 years ago and it still does not make enough money to pay for itself.
I'm not saying that all turnpikes are bad but I do think that we need to look closely at the OTA and slow the spending down until they can pay down some of the billions in debt that they have.

[scottk]

The OTA has built and manages 13 turnpikes. 3 of them pay for all 13. That is a less than 25% success rate. If I could bet on this I know where I would place my money.
The OTA is notoriously bad at traffic and review projections. The Cherokee Nation turnpike was opened 33 years ago and it still does not make enough money to pay for itself.
I'm not saying that all turnpikes are bad but I do think that we need to look closely at the OTA and slow the spending down until they can pay down some of the billions in debt that they have.

If I understand correctly, when OTA was seeking legislature approval to build the Kilpatrick and Creek in the late 1980's, rural lawmakers also wanted turnpikes, even though OTA said they would lose money due to less traffic on these "rural" routes, the only way to get the votes needed was to build these lesser traveled turnpikes to get the ones that were needed (Creek and Kilpatrick).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chickasaw_Turnpike

[BoulderSooner]

If I understand correctly, when OTA was seeking legislature approval to build the Kilpatrick and Creek in the late 1980's, rural lawmakers also wanted turnpikes, even though OTA said they would lose money due to less traffic on these "rural" routes, the only way to get the votes needed was to build these lesser traveled turnpikes to get the ones that were needed (Creek and Kilpatrick).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chickasaw_Turnpike

yep compromise .. imagine that ..

[bombermwc]

But the idea was to connect the metros with a faster route knowing that the state highways that were available before the turnpikes, were slow and poorly maintained.

Its sort of like college athletics. The big players subsidize the rest of the system but we still benefit from the whole system.

If Oklahomans weren't so dumb, we would have just given ODOT the money it needed to do the damned things themselves instead of creating the monster they did.

[BoulderSooner]

But the idea was to connect the metros with a faster route knowing that the state highways that were available before the turnpikes, were slow and poorly maintained.

Its sort of like college athletics. The big players subsidize the rest of the system but we still benefit from the whole system.

If Oklahomans weren't so dumb, we would have just given ODOT the money it needed to do the damned things themselves instead of creating the monster they did.

roads cost money maintaining roads costs money .. OTA solves that issue .. for the State legislature .. nothing about being dumb ..

if you live somewhere in Oklahoma and don't use the turnpike system it costs you 0.00 dollars ..

[jn1780]

If I understand correctly, when OTA was seeking legislature approval to build the Kilpatrick and Creek in the late 1980's, rural lawmakers also wanted turnpikes, even though OTA said they would lose money due to less traffic on these "rural" routes, the only way to get the votes needed was to build these lesser traveled turnpikes to get the ones that were needed (Creek and Kilpatrick).



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chickasaw_Turnpike

They also set the rates lower on the rural roads. So the rates are somewhat progressive. At the end day this is just a progressive vs consumption tax argument.

[rte66man]

I would argue the Cherokee was needed as a substitute for the deathtrap that was OK33 (now US412B or something). There was no way ODOT had the $$$ to do it.

[bombermwc]

roads cost money maintaining roads costs money .. OTA solves that issue .. for the State legislature .. nothing about being dumb ..

if you live somewhere in Oklahoma and don't use the turnpike system it costs you 0.00 dollars ..

That's the most capitalist statement i've seen here in a very long time. But it does definitely reflect the opinions of a lot of Oklahomans. My retort would be, you could very easily extend that same logic to education. If you don't have kids in school any longer, why should you pay for it? Socialism isn't a bad word folks. We use it every day in the US...and this is an example of it. Otherwise we would all have to pay for private access roads/etc. What you do with that Socialism is what differentiates US Socialism from Communist Socialism.

The reason is multifaceted but in general here are the two main reasons to support these things.
1 - because everyone benefits from it being done and being done well and in a way that's not corrupt.
2 - I'll say it again, when you widen the base, you lower the rate. When everyone pays for something like education or roads, across the ENTIRE population, then the amount that each person has to pay is much lower.

You benefit from them being there even if you don't directly use them. Your doctors are educated here (among a million other professions as well) and EVERYTHING you purchase, uses a road as some point to get from A to B, including the turnpike (especially if you live in Tulsa).

I would prefer to abolish the OTA and just give ODOT the money to handle the roads. But it does mean that we would have to raise a tax...and in Oklahoma, that's heresy.

Stitt wanted to say he passed that whole grocery tax thing. Well those $200M didn't go away, they just took it from somewhere else....and you still paid for it. We're not all that dumb mr sh!tt.

[BoulderSooner]

2 - I'll say it again, when you widen the base, you lower the rate. When everyone pays for something like education or roads, across the ENTIRE population, then the amount that each person has to pay is much lower.
.

when people that don't use turnpikes they pay 0.00 dollars for them .. every one less those people pay nothing

[CaptDave]

never mind.....

[David]

I still don't understand why people are assuming new major metro area turnpikes are going to be money losers without contemplating that the existing non-money losing turnpikes are the ones in the state's major metro areas.

[MagzOK]

I still don't understand why people are assuming new major metro area turnpikes are going to be money losers without contemplating that the existing non-money losing turnpikes are the ones in the state's major metro areas.

It's just a hatred for turnpikes, period. There's a lot of it for some reason. Me, I love the turnpikes. They're significantly maintained better than non-turnpike highways, they're significantly better during winter weather bouts, they are generally just better to drive on. No offense to ODOT, I mean they do the best they can do with their limited funding.

We just got back from Dallas yesterday and used turnpikes all over north Texas. With the federal government not really opening new interstates -- or if they are they're super slow to do it -- turnpikes can get it done now. And the best part is that if you don't drive on it, you don't have to worry about paying for it.

[jn1780]

It's just a hatred for turnpikes, period. There's a lot of it for some reason. Me, I love the turnpikes. They're significantly maintained better than non-turnpike highways, they're significantly better during winter weather bouts, they are generally just better to drive on. No offense to ODOT, I mean they do the best they can do with their limited funding.

We just got back from Dallas yesterday and used turnpikes all over north Texas. With the federal government not really opening new interstates -- or if they are they're super slow to do it -- turnpikes can get it done now. And the best part is that if you don't drive on it, you don't have to worry about paying for it.

If I-44 wasn't tolled, a lot of out-of-state revenue would be taken off the table. That's where the education comparison stops making sense. We are not paying for Texas, Missouri, or Kansas kids to attend our schools. And the out-of-state vehicles are not always directly benefiting Oklahoma's economy; some are passing through.

That's kind of the idea around most of Oklahoma's turnpikes, trying to get out-of-state traffic to drive around the metro areas. Saving ODOT money on maintenance and expansion on interstates going through the metro areas. Now I think a strong argument can made that those rural turnpikes in the middle of nowhere should be converted into non-turnpikes. These were are all 'delegated' to OTA anyway by state legislature and have been around for decades.

[BoulderSooner]

That's the most capitalist statement i've seen here in a very long time..

thank you for the kind words

[Jeremy Martin]

Who will be the thousands of people that will need to use the north/south connector that is planned to go through east Norman?

[Jeremy Martin]

[QUOTE=MagzOK;1285194]It's just a hatred for turnpikes, period. There's a lot of it for some reason. Me, I love the turnpikes. They're significantly maintained better than non-turnpike highways, they're significantly better during winter weather bouts, they are generally just better to drive on. No offense to ODOT, I mean they do the best they can do with their limited funding.

I think my issue is with the OTA, not all turnpikes. This is taken from the OTA about page, "To construct, maintain, repair, and operate Turnpike projects and highways, with their access and connecting roads at such locations and on such routes as it shall determine to be feasible and economically sound."
During discovery in the latest lawsuit against the OTA it was found that if the OTA does not issue more bonds that they will not have the money to continue to repay them. This is my issue with them, They are not financially sound and they have to build and create more debt just to survive. Everyone who uses the turnpikes has to pay for their reckless spending. How about we get the existing bond debt under control before they get Oklahoma 10 billion more in the hole?
Please read this page to learn why they can't make enough money.
https://pikeoffota.com/why-does-a-ro...-is-in-charge/ I know the source is anti-turnpike but they do site their work to back up what they are saying.

[OKCTalker]

I would prefer to abolish the OTA and just give ODOT the money to handle the roads. But it does mean that we would have to raise a tax...and in Oklahoma, that's heresy.

Abolishing the OTA would also require repaying all bondholders. The State of Oklahoma doesn't have the money to do that either.

The point being that every penny for turnpikes came from either user fees (tolls) or investors - not taxpayers. No one has ever been forced to drive on them or invest in them.

[BoulderSooner]

[QUOTE=Jeremy Martin;1285276]

https://pikeoffota.com/why-does-a-ro...-is-in-charge/ I know the source is anti-turnpike but they do site their work to back up what they are saying.

that link is LOL

not well sourced or well reasoned ..

[David]

Who will be the thousands of people that will need to use the north/south connector that is planned to go through east Norman?

I'm one, I would use that regularly.

[MagzOK]

I'm one, I would use that regularly.

I will also. I drive to north Texas regularly and would gladly pay to bypass central OKC/I35 from Edmond to get out of town. I will also utilize it when going to OU sporting events in Norman during the weekday evenings just to bypass the bumper to bumper commuters.

[bombermwc]

Abolishing the OTA would also require repaying all bondholders. The State of Oklahoma doesn't have the money to do that either.

The point being that every penny for turnpikes came from either user fees (tolls) or investors - not taxpayers. No one has ever been forced to drive on them or invest in them.

Sort of repeating record here, but those bonds could easily be paid by the new tax dollars raised. The debt doesn't disappear just because OTA goes away. It would just have to transfer to the state. Think of it like an infrastructure acquisition.

@Boulder - my statement wasn't to support or detract from that capitalist statement. it was just to state what that statement was.
I think you still missed the point of what I was saying though. In fact you just rolled right over it. You're right, if you dont use it, you dont pay for it. Just like my example of the public education system. But my point was that if ODOT maintained these instead, it would be better for everyone.

About the comment of out of state drivers, there still can be fuel/charging taxes on those folks. The state is large enough that it would be difficult to traverse the entire state without having to stop at least once for fuel/charging. Much like a toll, it just becomes a use tax. But again, that folds into how we start collecting taxes as gasoline becomes less of a thing over the next 50 years. Even diesel will likely be reduced eventually as electric semis become more practical (very long term view). Might as well start planning for them now.

[BoulderSooner]

Sort of repeating record here, but those bonds could easily be paid by the new tax dollars raised. The debt doesn't disappear just because OTA goes away. It would just have to transfer to the state. Think of it like an infrastructure acquisition.

@Boulder - my statement wasn't to support or detract from that capitalist statement. it was just to state what that statement was.
I think you still missed the point of what I was saying though. In fact you just rolled right over it. You're right, if you dont use it, you dont pay for it. Just like my example of the public education system. But my point was that if ODOT maintained these instead, it would be better for everyone.

About the comment of out of state drivers, there still can be fuel/charging taxes on those folks. The state is large enough that it would be difficult to traverse the entire state without having to stop at least once for fuel/charging. Much like a toll, it just becomes a use tax. But again, that folds into how we start collecting taxes as gasoline becomes less of a thing over the next 50 years. Even diesel will likely be reduced eventually as electric semis become more practical (very long term view). Might as well start planning for them now.

the diesel tax for truckers won't come close to replacing their tolls .. and out of state driving currently pay fuel taxes ..

[OKCTalker]

Sort of repeating record here, but those bonds could easily be paid by the new tax dollars raised. The debt doesn't disappear just because OTA goes away. It would just have to transfer to the state. Think of it like an infrastructure acquisition.

"New tax dollars" means more taxes, and the debt "transferring to the state" means putting perhaps a billion in new debt on Oklahomans. That would require at a minimum a majority vote of both houses and the Governor, and voting for those things would be political suicide.

As for "infrastructure acquisition," roads are cost centers, not profit centers, and the cost of turnpikes is currently paid by tolls. Your plan would shift that to Oklahoma taxpayers. Again - a nonstarter.

[jn1780]

The first step would be to actually let ODOT issue bonds to complete whole projects at one time. You would see less OTA sponsored in the future if this was done.