Oklahoma Senator Mary Boren (D-Norman) filed a resolution on Tuesday that would require the Oklahoma State Auditor and Inspector to inspect the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority, following a lawsuit filed against the OTA.
Boren’s Senate Concurrent Resolution 28, unlike her previous Senate Resolution 25 with a similar goal of auditing the OTA, would require the State Auditor’s office to review the Oklahoma Department of Transportation and OTA’s financial documents regarding property purchases. Both resolutions demand a moratorium on the construction of new turnpikes.
“Before we start making plans to build new turnpikes, we need to figure out how to pay off what we already have and make sure every homeowner is empowered to negotiate for the best terms possible, even if they are not wealthy and well-connected,” Boren said in a press release.
On May 4, The Oklahoma Council of Bond Oversight granted OTA a $200 million line of credit, under the condition it not be used for the funding of the South Extension, the East-West Connector and the Tri-City Connector following the lawsuit filed by 23 individuals and Pike Off OTA — a grassroots organization formed in opposition to the ACCESS Oklahoma turnpike proposal.
In the lawsuit, attorneys Elaine Dowling and Robert Norman argue that via the Oklahoma Turnpike Enabling Act, the construction of these three turnpikes are illegal.
In the Enabling Act, OTA is granted 35 specific locations that end south of Norman to build turnpikes. In a memorandum to the Council of Bond Oversight, Dowling said Purcell, the projected end of the South Extension Turnpike, is 20 miles south of any granted area.
“There is simply no school of statutory construction that allows for any finding other than that the South Extension is simply not authorized by statute,” Dowling wrote in her memorandum.
According to the suit, the East-West Connector and the Tri-City Connector would be in violation of Oklahoma State Statute Title 69, section 1705, which allows only one bond issue for a 1987 turnpike proposal that included these connectors, meaning OTA could not hold another bond issue to support these connectors.
Norman wrote in his memorandum that in order to fund ACCESS Oklahoma, the OTA would have to execute “new, separate and subsequent” bonds.
Because OTA is not legally authorized to hold another bond issue for these connectors, the suit argues their construction would be illegal. Norman wrote, due to Title 69 limiting OTA to one bond issue and one bond indenture program, these projects would have had to be built with the “Oklahoma City Outer Loop” in 1989 when the bonds were issued.
“If the OTA wishes to fund, bond, and build (the connectors) at this late date … the OTA needs to convince the legislature to repeal or amend the second sentence of Section 1705,” Norman wrote.
The suit also lists the areas where the OTA didn’t give indication they would “fully comply with and abide by'' its legal duties and obligations, which included the performance of economic, environmental, geological and impact studies.
In a statement following the council’s decision, the OTA announced money from its general fund will support the continuation of these studies. Also, OTA will seek judicial validation of bonds to finance the construction of the new turnpikes from the Oklahoma Supreme Court.
“Such validation actions give all persons interested in the matter an opportunity to be heard, present legal opposition against the issuance of the bonds, and ensure the Authority has the legal authorization to undertake the projects to be financed by the bonds, thereby providing certainty for all involved,” the statement read.
