The Worst Roads in the U.S.

[UnFrSaKn]

Another one of these stories.

http://finance.yahoo.com/insurance/a...ica-mainstreet

3. Oklahoma

Poor-condition mileage rank: 3 out of 50
Deficient bridges rank: 13 out of 50
Fatalities rank: 11 out of 50
Congestion rank: 34 out of 50

With more than 400 miles of the iconic Route 66 within its borders, Oklahoma has not benefited from the road's historic status to attract more money to its road system. It logs the third-highest amount of poor-condition mileage in the U.S., while its bridges rank 13th. Fatalities are also a problem in the Sooner State, but the authorities are at least addressing the problem head-on, with a 2009 report on road safety that includes pictures of the worst stretches of its roads.

[Dustin]

We're not #1!! We're not #1!!!!

[dcsooner]

reality is roads in Oklahoma are horrible. I have always wondered where toll road money goes because it certainly isn't spent on highway upkeep and beautification

[bombermwc]

Toll road money goes to toll road maintence and the toll authory's management's pockets. ODOT has said many times that it doesn't really want the toll roads because they can't afford them.

We NEED that 5cent/gallon gas tax for roads....so badly. If only people would stop the knee-jerk reaction of tax = no way. If they'd only realize that it would mean a whopping total of $1 more for the average fill-up but would mean so many many millions for roads. And it's a use tax if there ever was one...the more you use, the more you pay.

[Larry OKC]

Toll road money goes to toll road maintence and the toll authory's management's pockets. ODOT has said many times that it doesn't really want the toll roads because they can't afford them.

We NEED that 5cent/gallon gas tax for roads....so badly. If only people would stop the knee-jerk reaction of tax = no way. If they'd only realize that it would mean a whopping total of $1 more for the average fill-up but would mean so many many millions for roads. And it's a use tax if there ever was one...the more you use, the more you pay.

You an use that justification for just about any tax that comes along. Guess what, 5 cents here, a dime there and before you know it you are paying 38 cents a gallon in taxes. The same argument is used when they raise the price of gas. "it's only 5 cents a gallon". Then guess what, before you know it you are paying $1 more per gallon than you were just 6 months ago.

We don't NEED the 5 cents increase in taxes. The problem has never been the revenue side but the expenditure side. More than enough money has been collected over the decades in transportation taxes to fully fund every road and bridge in the state. The problem is "transportation" taxes often get diverted to non-transportation areas. It's a large tax base. Even if they were to raise the tax by an additional $1/gallon, they would be claiming they don't have enough money. Just as the education folks would still be claiming education isn't a priority (even though education gets roughly half the state budget and the largest piece of the pie). Even if they got 100% of the budget, they would claim it isn't enough.

[bombermwc]

Actually, that's the only tax i've ever posted here that I'm in favor of. I happen to be one of those people that thinks that in order to pay for a service, you have to have the income from the citizentry to fund it. It's quite a foreign concept. I do not, however, willy nilly support taxes hikes...not sure where you got that.

Hey guess what, you're paying $3 more a gallon right now and not pissing and moaning about it. And guess what, it's not providing you with any added benefit, it's going as profit to refining companies. So wouldn't you rather have that piss-ant little 5 cents come back to you rather than some executive's pocket?

And if you think funding isn't the problem on ODOT's side, you're just out of touch. You try operating a department on a budget from the 80's and see how much you can accomplish. They've worked their butts off to try and make up for it with grants and all, but there's only so much you can do. That's why I suggest something like that tax. It's lock-boxed for transportation (it was in the bill that way). The cost of everything has gone up, including materials for construction. In fact, as oil goes up, roads go even higher because asphalt uses so much oil. Juding from your last post, it seems like you have a greivance, but not the ammunition behind it to support the claims.

FYI - while education is a large part, that's also mostly used in payroll for salaries. There are consolidation questions, admin salary questions, on and on. As you say, it's about the dollars making their way to the classroom and not being diverted. But when you have the largest payroll in the state, of course you're going to need money for it. But just as a comparison here, let me thrown something out there. Per-Student-Allotment is something extra curricular groups get to fund them....ie band. Those funds are used to pay for things like busses to events....not salaries. Band doesn't get to use the school activity account in most districts. So, what we've seen is the PSA go down year by year until basically there is nothing left. Take a bus for a minute. Mid-Del charges $1 per mile per bus + normal driver time + overtime of the driver (without notice) to the organization "renting" the bus. So for a trip to a game in Edmond, a school can spend several hundred dollars....just to go support their team. Right now they are facing a shortfall that would make the PSA ZERO. So the booster groups would be the sole income. And a band can't survice on concessions alone. And the kids already fundraise all year to help out. There are contest fees, music, instructors, etc. So I'd like to see the explanation of how that can be resolved with current numbers while the rest of the school is already facing similar cuts. Cuts cuts cuts, that's all they see...all the while costs continue to rise. If you're happy with that being the future of education where we keep falling further and further down the scale in comparison to other countries, ok. But then you don't get to gripe when we're 50th and we no longer have the brains to innovate and since we already shipped our manufacturing overseas, we'll be in a pickle like Greece.

[cameron_405]

...would like to see transparency in the bidding process for projects from the federal to local level.

[rcjunkie]

...would like to see transparency in the bidding process for projects from the federal to local level.

That's easy, all projects let for bid are public record and available for viewing. most can be found on line. ODOT has monthly bid opening meetings that are open to the public.

[cameron_405]

That's easy, all projects let for bid are public record and available for viewing. most can be found on line. ODOT has monthly bid opening meetings that are open to the public.

...too bad many of the 'more information' links don't work on the state's site.

State of Oklahoma Recovery and Reinvestment Website - Transportation

[Larry OKC]

Actually, that's the only tax i've ever posted here that I'm in favor of. I happen to be one of those people that thinks that in order to pay for a service, you have to have the income from the citizentry to fund it. It's quite a foreign concept. I do not, however, willy nilly support taxes hikes...not sure where you got that.

My apologies. I didn't think you did, just saying the same justification can be used on just about any tax that comes along ("It's only X amount"). I agree to get a service you have to be willing to pay for it, and that is part of my point. We have paid for it time and again. Often resulting in shoddy, substandard work that doesn't last as long as expected and has to be done over time & again (often at an increased cost).

Hey guess what, you're paying $3 more a gallon right now and not pissing and moaning about it. And guess what, it's not providing you with any added benefit, it's going as profit to refining companies. So wouldn't you rather have that piss-ant little 5 cents come back to you rather than some executive's pocket?

Believe me, I do that every time I fill up. I would much rather it stay in my pocket than an executives (or a Legislator's or skimmed off and pocket by those in the Construction business).

And if you think funding isn't the problem on ODOT's side, you're just out of touch. You try operating a department on a budget from the 80's and see how much you can accomplish. They've worked their butts off to try and make up for it with grants and all, but there's only so much you can do. That's why I suggest something like that tax.

If ODOT actually got all of the funding from the Transportation taxes, but they don't. Not blaming ODOT for money they aren't allowed to have (but do hold them accountable for spending the money they do receive appropriately). I do hold ODOT accountable when a project doubles in cost and is several years behind schedule (I-40 relocation).

It's lock-boxed for transportation (it was in the bill that way).

If I believed for one minute that putting it in a lock box would actually result in ALL of the money going to what they said it would, then I would have supported it then and now. The problem with Lock-boxes are someone figures out how to pick the lock. Recent examples where we have seen that it doesn't work is the Education Lottery and the dedicated Public Safety tax. Then we have the problem where it looks like there are restrictions (but there really aren't) as with the MAPS 3 money. But I am getting off topic again, so I am going to do something out of my norm and save the education reply for another appropriate thread.

[king183]

We don't NEED the 5 cents increase in taxes. The problem has never been the revenue side but the expenditure side. More than enough money has been collected over the decades in transportation taxes to fully fund every road and bridge in the state. The problem is "transportation" taxes often get diverted to non-transportation areas. It's a large tax base. Even if they were to raise the tax by an additional $1/gallon, they would be claiming they don't have enough money. Just as the education folks would still be claiming education isn't a priority (even though education gets roughly half the state budget and the largest piece of the pie). Even if they got 100% of the budget, they would claim it isn't enough.

This is exactly right. Just up until recently (and maybe still), the legislature consistently "stole" money from the transportation taxes and used it to pay for something else unrelated to transportation. If ODOT's budget was actually what was collected in "transportation taxes," we'd have the most pristine roads this side of Mars. Maybe that's a bit of an exaggeration, but our roads would be in much better condition.

I believe the legislature is planning to do something similar again this year: they're going to take tax revenue out of ODOT's budget and replace it with a bond. Does anyone know if this is the case?

[Spartan]

Another one of these stories.

http://finance.yahoo.com/insurance/a...ica-mainstreet

3. Oklahoma

Poor-condition mileage rank: 3 out of 50
Deficient bridges rank: 13 out of 50
Fatalities rank: 11 out of 50
Congestion rank: 34 out of 50

With more than 400 miles of the iconic Route 66 within its borders, Oklahoma has not benefited from the road's historic status to attract more money to its road system. It logs the third-highest amount of poor-condition mileage in the U.S., while its bridges rank 13th. Fatalities are also a problem in the Sooner State, but the authorities are at least addressing the problem head-on, with a 2009 report on road safety that includes pictures of the worst stretches of its roads.

That's what I call improvement!

[bombermwc]

There in lies the key folks. It's all in how the bill is crafted. You have to do your best to author the bill in such a manner that prevents as much "stealing" as possible. Of course the legislature is going to find a way to shuffle funds...the lottery is a good example of it. That bill did NOT do an adequate job of saying that the lottery money was to only be a supplement. Instead, they treat it as a replacement for regular funds....thereby removing any benefit from it.

That's the sort of thing you have to pay close attention to when a bill is authored....however, if you wait for the perfect bill to happen, NOTHING will happen. So, like with anything in politics, you have to pick what you feel is the best option and go with it. So if that means we do a 5 cent tax now (lock box or not), then at least something is happening. Otherwise, we already see what the alternative is. I'm in no way saying give the capital a blank check to do whatever they want (lord knows they're just a crooked as any other capital). But you have to start somewhere and work from that point. Otherwise you end up getting nothing done for a very long time. Not to stray to a different topic, but that's what the department of education has been stuck at for 30 years (not talking funding...rather reform). No one wants to "start somewhere"...they want it all at once and can't agree on what that should be, so nothing happens. <-see the current federal defeceit. LOL