Wick's really got the hammer down over there if he's got even Rod Davis toting the note on this crap. Rod, you are the new Steve Blow.
I gather from the breathless quality of your prose that this may have been one of your first ventures into bond language. I see that you are excited to be there, and I am excited for you.
Of course the road is described in the bond proposal language. Your reference to the separate summary, however, is a little wobbly, because the city has testified in court that it considers all statements and publications, even its own, "non-binding," except for the bond language itself.
I actually love it that you are going to argue the Trinity Project was always "fundamentally a traffic project."
Please stick with that, and I know you will. Please go forward into the marketplace and trumpet that great thought to the voters. I couldn't hope for a better scenario: the people who think that Dallas voted for lakes and parks versus the people who think that Dallas voted for a toll road.
If you have any sincere or honest intellectual interest in this issue, you need to examine the concept of "reliever route." Have you seen a lot of "reliever routes" around the country? I don't think so.
The actual concept, in traffic terms, is called "congestion mitigation," and it's a part of state and federal law. TxDot's own numbers show that the most efficient way to mitigate congestion is not to build new roads at all but to beef up the roads we have -- the ones that go where people already want to go, not where they don't want to go yet but you wish they did because your boss sucks up to the people who own the land and you suck up to your boss. That's called a "development road." Its purpose is to spur development, not relieve mitigation.
We Believe Local Journalism is Critical to the Life of a City
Engaging with our readers is essential to the Observer's mission. Make a financial contribution or sign up for a newsletter, and help us keep telling Dallas's stories with no paywalls.
Support Our Journalism
The real joke here is that a freeway through the middle of the park will kill development along its route, not spur it. But the people seeking it are too old and too stupid to understand that.
But if what you want is a reliever route, Rod, then great: Put it down Industrial, not through the middle of the park. I'm sure the people who own disused pallet-storage yards and taxi-cab cemeteries there will be handsomely compensated through the eminent domain process and will happily relocate farther from downtown where they belong.
Do you really believe we should sacrifice a great band of water and green space through the center of our city in order to preserve Industrial Boulevard? Rod, Rod, who gave you this notion?
Rod, I am saddened. It took you a long time to sip from the Suck-up Julep over there. But like everyone who goes to work for the confederate media in this town, eventually you sipped. --Jim Schutze