Arkansas River Dam

[TURobY]

In today's Tulsa World, there was mention of a $475 million bond issue, some of which includes "money for a dam project on the Arkansas River". Anybody know what this is?

[Conan71]

I think they'd be better off to allow private donors like T. Boone to fund professorships and use the state's $100mm to lower tuition rates or provide grants or scholarships.

[waterboy]

It didn't say the amount which would have been a tip. I'm guessing its one of the two proposed dams either Sand Springs or Jenks.

[waterboy]

I believe that was the cost estimate of the Jenks dam.

[Renaissance]

quote:Originally posted by TURobY

In today's Tulsa World, there was mention of a $475 million bond issue, some of which includes "money for a dam project on the Arkansas River". Anybody know what this is?

I have a feeling it's pork traded for pork.  We need more coverage of what goes on in the legislature.  Seems to me it must have been the product of some intense backroom horse trading to get OKC's projects--NBA subsidies and continued work on the Native American Indian Center--their funding.  

And the amount for the dam is $25 million.  The articles states, "Three other needs will receive $25 million each."  Jenks dam?

[TheArtist]

There apparently has been some interesting machinations going on at the capitol. I think the Mayor is doing a lot to try and get some stuff for Tulsa. Her experience and connections down there are coming in handy. We usually get practically nothing.

I was all complaining about not getting the 3 mill, or whatever it was, for the Race Riot Memorial, and OKC getting, now 25mill for the Indian Cultural Center.  I was hoping we would at least get the 3mill since they were asking for 30-45mill for the OKC thing.

Apparently what seems to have been going on was that the Mayor has been pushing all along for Tulsa to get some funding for dams from the state so that we can get the matching Federal money. And that was probably where OKC decided to go for the Indian Cultural Center funding.

Also I keep getting slight hints that there may still be some possibility of a development along the river here in Tulsa? Or am I just misreading the tea leaves? This....  http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectID=11&articleID=20080521_11_A13_spancl449918  Plus the funding from the state now for the dams...

Another interesting thing to watch is where the states "endowment matching funds" will go. Kaiser has donated a lot of money to Tulsas colleges 35mill specifically for endowments to OSU Tulsa alone that need to be matched. Pickens just donated 100 mill a large part of which, if not all, will needed to be matched. Other donors have also pledged money to both OSU and OU endowments.  The 100 mill the state has passed will not cover all the donations from both Pickens and Kaiser. Someone is going to lose out on this round. Will keep an eye out to see what goes where.

[jackbristow]

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=20080523_16_A1_spancl495558

Today's article clears up a couple of the questions posted.  Specifically, the portion for matching endowments is to be split equally between what is owed OSU and OU.

The $25mil for the River Dams is expected to draw $50mil in Federal Matching funds.

The biggest portion of the bond is for roads and bridges.

FINALLY, it sounds like our city and state are getting off their collective rear ends and doing something about the road problems.  Hopefully it is enough, but if not, at least its a start.

If Tulsa votes down the street proposal that will put $700 Million toward our city's roads without increasing the taxes, I will freaking puke.

[Double A]

But I thought river development was dead? This is just another example of vindication for those who worked to oppose the frivolous, regressive river tax. Not to mention the fact, it spurred our do nothing Tulsa area legislators(both state and federal) to get off their lazy asses and start bringing home the bacon for Tulsa instead of just complacently and apathetically enabling Tulsa's donor city status. I love the smell of vindication in the morning, it smells like victory. Just remember, I told you so.

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by Double A

But I thought river development was dead? This is just another example of vindication for those who worked to oppose the frivolous, regressive river tax. Not to mention the fact, it spurred our do nothing Tulsa area legislators(both state and federal) to get off their lazy asses and start bringing home the bacon for Tulsa instead of just complacently and apathetically enabling Tulsa's donor city status. I love the smell of vindication in the morning, it smells like victory. Just remember, I told you so.

The only insight you have is that our area politicians did see the light and go lobby the real source of funding in this state for some help. With the bond issue being debated the timing was right. Others might say they wiggled their way into the trough. This effort btw, is one I and others have suggested for a long time. Either way it is an effort to help fund plans that have been in works for years.

If it puts lead in your pencil to think that A. you had anything to do with it or B. that anyone cares, then wallow in it. But recognize this. What river development is occurring is without the input of common folk like you and me. It is the Warren and Kaiser foundations, corporates and behind the scenes lobbying that now determine what that development will be.

You'll still pay one way or another, you simply have no say in the results now. For instance, would the public have suggested that the natural diversity and location of trees along the banks of the river be removed and replaced with symmetrical homogeneous types of trees placed on the thin strip of land next to the curbs of Riverside? Or that those runners who enjoyed the natural paths to asphalt should be ignored? No, those are suburban conformity views of nature (clean it up, make it pretty, make it all match). Even all the art is homogeneous and traditional. The only public input now is corporate or wealthy. Thanks.

Smoke that in your vindication bong.

[Double A]

The dams are part of the river master plan developed through public input, right? There were numerous things included in the failed river tax that weren't part of that plan, so what is your point? I'll partake when you stop bogarting.

[TheArtist]

I am just glad to see stuff progressing.  Wont be as nice or nearly as much stuff as it would have been, or as quick, but still a great improvement on what we have now. I dont think anyone in their right mind thought that just because the vote didnt happen that NO development in or along the river would EVER happen. It was about how much and how soon and at what cost.

We are still paying for it one way or the other, instead of our tax dollars directly going to the dams they are being filtered through the state, our tax dollars paying for paper pushers there and then borrowed with bonds that we will end up paying more on. I guess if you dont immediately see it, it doesnt affect you as obviously. Its still coming out of our pockets. Same with the Federal money.

Even with what Kaiser and QT are doing its nothing compared to what could have been done with the 100mill plus we were going to get given to us.  Still very nice though to see some progress. Every little bit is a definite improvement on what we had.

Would still really like to see something done at the 71st area. The Living River concept is probably dead.  I am still crossing my fingers and hoping they do the Sand Springs dam as the larger one to hold and release water during the day in slower flow times. Dont know if they will build the other pedestrian bridges either? Or is that being included in the cost of the dams?  

I think once more gets done on the river and the average person can really get a feel and good look at what great river amenities are actually like... we will see much more positive outlook and excitement for future projects and improvements. People will start to "get it" and see what it can do for them and the city.  

[sauerkraut]

The dam could also have a trail on top of it to connect the northern half of the RiverSide trail to the trail on the west side of the river. They should also build a full legnth trail along the west bank of the Arkansas River from downtown all the way south to Jenks. I'd really like the RiverSide trails extended farther south past the turnpike for a few more miles.[]

[waterboy]

I agree with your post, Artist. Once things begin to happen with this money, the ball will start rolling again.

AA, if you can't even understand the example I gave you...what is the point in providing more? But I'll try. Lets try, placement of the dams and feedback programs to get real public input, not insider input.

For instance (again). (1)The first dam will likely be the Jenks dam even though as Artist points out the SS dam makes more sense. Why? Investors have already put money at risk there with the Riverwalk and RiverDistrict. They stand to benefit more. Jenks is more agressive than SS. The SS plan is better. So what? Its going to Jenks.

Yet, as V2025 points out on another thread, the placement of the dam was wholly a decision by the RiverDistrict board who obviously are not river users. No ramp, no piers, no docks and no protected harbor. One might think they don't welcome public usage of a public river or that it is post card status only. One would be right.

The two of us on this forum who do know the value of those items from personal experience, Argus and myself certainly had no chance for input. Yes, those plans can and probably will change, but this is the procedure when money is derived from private and lobbyist sources.

(2)A method for surveying the public and informing them of progress. I have mentioned several times before the Trinity River development in Fort Worth. They utilize an interactive internet application that allows the public to voice their approval or support for different features on the development. They can even volunteer new ideas as well. No one can accuse their leaders of making it an elitist exercise in development. We're so techie here but alas, these features come from QT, Kaiser, Warren, RPA or outside consultants and are take it or leave it.

And forget your River Master plan. Everyone else has....Why do you think other plans keep springing up? Its public input was anemic and came from a poorly informed public.

Shall I continue? Do you get the drift Bart?

[YoungTulsan]

Dam it all

[Chris]

quote:Originally posted by YoungTulsan

Dam it all

[}:)]  Nice.