Thus the 'Politburo' moniker. With choices like Nada, Something Akin to Nada, and a still-too-big project with toll taxes, it's the Louisville transportation choice equivalent to a food market in the old Soviet Union.I've been to food markets in the old USSR, and yes, that's it: Brown lettuce, pickled beets and Kerry Stemler atop the Robert Moses Mausoleum in a furry cap with a hip flask of vodka, It's such an obvious image that I'm surprised it didn't occur to any of us previously.
Steve has a lot to say about the Bridges Politburo's accumulated outrages, so head over to his place and read all about it: The Ongoing Shenanigans of the Bridges Politburo — Community Action Requested on New and Old Outrages, by Steve Magruder (Louisville History & Issues).
2 comments:
The latest outrage, of course, is ORBP hired gun John Sacksteder's bit of revisionist history. As Steve and others have explained, Sacksteder's now claiming that citizens were asked to comment on the purpose and need of the project during the most recent comment period. That's bogus.
As I wrote in News and Tribune comments:
Here's what Sacksteder and Valentine said when the previous public meetings were announced:
----
“We want to meet people and let them understand that these are the steps that we are going to go through, there’s going to be a whole series of meetings that we want to engage [the public] in,” Sacksteder said.
However, he reiterated the bridges project will not change the purpose and need statement of a two bridge project with the rebuild of Spaghetti Junction.
Gary Valentine, project manager with the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, echoed the sentiment.
“What we’re doing in this upcoming set of meetings ... it’s about validation of our original decision-making process,” he said. “[It’s an] update of the supporting information that went around the development of the purpose and need statement of the project for the project.”
From the News and Tribune, May 11: http://bit.ly/pRC8HL
----
I attended the Indiana public input meeting and at no time during the presentation was it announced that citizens should use the opportunity to comment on the purpose and need, i.e., the validity of the all-or-nothing, two bridge and expanded junction 'solution'. Likewise, the public questionnaire asked people to choose between the very limited options provided, not to comment on the purpose and need or other alternatives.
If billions of dollars and the region's future weren't at stake, the CYA revisionism would almost be funny in a pathetic sort of way. Anyone want to take bets if members of the Bridges Authority and other officials charged with representing the public interest will step in and demand that the record be set straight?
And for the record, here's the official ORBP announcement of the input meetings and comment period.
What it said:
The SEIS is required to examine proposed changes in the 2003 Federal Highway Administration Record of Decision, including using tolls as a partial funding source for the new and improved I-65 bridges downtown and the new East End bridge.
The meetings are being held to present information and invite feedback on the proposed alternatives to be studied in the SEIS process:
* Building two new bridges and reconstructing the downtown Louisville interchange as recommended by the 2003 Federal Highway Administration Record of Decision
* Proceeding with the cost-saving versions for two new bridges and the rebuilt downtown interchange as recommended by Kentucky Gov. Steve Beshear, Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels and Louisville Mayor Greg Fischer
* Or not building any new bridges
Again, no mention of purpose and need, the part that's kept this project bogged down for so long by insisting on the bloated, unnecessary downtown portion of the project.
One thing I left out of my original list of "previous outrages" was when the Bridges Authority (LASIBA) promised to allow discussion of bridges project alternatives at one of their meetings, and then reneged on that promise.
Thanks for picking up on my topic.
I would just note that I consider the Bridges Project, Bridges Coalition, and Bridges Authority to be in the same basket (after all, in some respects, they're the same participants/lapdogs). Together, they comprise the Bridges Politburo.
Post a Comment