Now that ACCESS Oklahoma turnpike expansion is approved, what's next?

Opponents of ACCESS Oklahoma are running out of options to stop resumption of Oklahoma Turnpike Authority plans to acquire, by eminent domain if necessary, hundreds of homes to make way for new toll roads.

The Norman-area coalition, Pike-Off, say they are not giving up their fight after the Oklahoma Supreme Court rejected a request to rehear a decision that allows the turnpike authority to proceed with selling $500 million in bonds.

Turnpike officials are hoping to sell the first $500 million in bonds later this month. They caution efforts to restart acquisitions and engineering may take months. So what happens next? The work stoppage continues until bonds are sold, and even then does not end opposition to ACCESS Oklahoma, which was launched on Feb. 22, 2022.

Here is a look at how we got to this point in the fight between the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority and Pike-Off over the $5 billion turnpike expansion plan:

Federal rejection of new toll road corridor through Lake Thunderbird yet to be resolved

At the federal level the Bureau of Land Reclamation rejected a turnpike authority application to build a new toll road segment through tributaries of Lake Thunderbird. Citing concerns about the impact to protected species in the area, sound and light pollution, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation in January denied an application along the route of the south extension because the project did not meet the land’s intended purposes.

Records obtained by The Oklahoman also showed David Streb and his firm, Poe & Associates, informed the Bureau of Reclamation that construction on the east-west connector would start in 2024 and construction on the south extension toll road will start in 2027 with completion in 2037.

That timeline conflicted with statements by Secretary of Transportation Tim Gatz that work on the Norman-area toll roads wouldn’t start until the “tail end” of the 15-year ACCESS Oklahoma timeline.  The dispute with the Bureau of Land Reclamation, meanwhile, has yet to be resolved.

More: Turnpike authority, hit with lawsuits, investigative audit, halts ACCESS Oklahoma

Oklahoma Turnpike Authority investigative audit continues

Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond, responding to concerns over ACCESS Oklahoma, cited questions of “legal misconduct” by the turnpike authority and asked state Auditor Cindy Byrd in March to launch an investigative audit into the agency, the first in its history. That audit continues. Transportation Secretary Tim Gatz said his agency is cooperating with the audit and he doesn't see it delaying work on ACCESS Oklahoma.

A taxpayer lawsuit also alleges the turnpike authority illegally paid more than $67 million on ACCESS Oklahoma, most of it to engineering firms led by or employing past state transportation engineers.

Are the proposed extensions for the Kickapoo Turnpike legal?

At the heart of the contested toll roads is an effort by the turnpike authority to create a “reliever” toll road to address traffic jams along southbound Interstate 35 between Oklahoma City and Norman. The Oklahoman, however, found engineers used traffic projections that excluded the impact of rebuilt junctions along I-35 at Interstate 240 and Indian Hills Road.

The population projections also fall short of forecasts by the city of Oklahoma City.

The first lawsuit filed by homeowners, represented by attorney Rob Norman, alleged that much of the south extension turnpike that would connect to I-35 in Purcell is not among 35 corridors approved by lawmakers in 1987. Lawmakers killed an effort by the turnpike authority to do such an extension when it was proposed in 1999.

That lawsuit was combined with the validation request heard by the Oklahoma Supreme Court — validation required for any bond sales by the turnpike authority. A divided Oklahoma Supreme Court approved the validation request, essentially dismissing claims the new toll roads were not authorized by lawmakers.

Work on ACCESS Oklahoma started prior to bond approval

The turnpike authority did not wait for approval to sell bonds to start spending on engineering, consulting, land purchases and other costs related to starting ACCESS Oklahoma. To date, the turnpike authority has spent more than $73 million on ACCESS Oklahoma out of funding that was reserved for capital maintenance projects.

Expenditures included $5.3 million for nine properties in the pathway of the proposed new toll roads with another $201,475 paid to the property owners for moving expenses. The early purchases were justified as addressing the property owners’ special circumstances, which included partially built homes and land that was listed for sale.

The first purchase, however, was with Rep. Sherrie Conley, whose listed special circumstance was her Newcastle home was in the path of the toll road expansion.

Conley was paid $103,460 above the appraised value and was given nearly $26,000 in moving expenses. OTA Deputy Director Joe Echelle told The Oklahoman in previous interviews the property could be sold at auction should ACCESS Oklahoma not proceed as planned. Conley has since announced she is not planning to seek re-election in 2024.

Transparency pledges challenges

District Judge Timothy Olsen in December granted summary judgment on all counts in a case in which attorneys representing homeowners in the path of the new toll roads alleged the turnpike authority changed agendas to prevent the public from getting details of the ACCESS Oklahoma plan in advance of it being presented to the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority board.

The Oklahoma Open Meeting Act requires that subjects to be discussed be provided to the public as part of agendas posted in advance of meetings. The Oklahoman’s own requests for maps and information about the expansion were not met prior to the Feb. 22 unveiling of ACCESS Oklahoma.

The Oklahoma Supreme Court, however, overturned the ruling against the turnpike authority. The court on Monday dismissed a request for a rehearing on the open meetings ruling.

The Oklahoman also discovered the turnpike authority, which promised transparency on its expansion effort, sought to complicate efforts by potential opponents to amplify their arguments online.

Emails between turnpike authority spokeswoman Jessica Brown and Carolyn Taylor, with Jones PR, revealed Taylor’s firm compiled a list of potential domains that might have been used to oppose the $5 billion ACCESS Oklahoma plan that is tied up in litigation filed by homeowners fighting to keep their properties. The PR firm also was contracted to track and report opponents' social media postings to turnpike officials. Brown, who started at the turnpike authority in June, 2021, left the agency in August.

Brown responded she was trying to ensure people could find accurate information online. The agency continues to deny it violated the open meetings act and their appeal was upheld by the Oklahoma Supreme Court.

The turnpike authority also refused to allow opponents to ask questions or share concerns with commission members at their public meeting on Aug. 1. Gatz said the agency will decide when items on an agenda might deserve public comment and that the public does not have the right to address board members.

Taxpayer lawsuit continues

Attorney Richard Labarthe filed a taxpayer lawsuit, also known as a qui tam action, that represents 100 residents alleging the turnpike authority illegally continued paying engineers and consultants after Olsen ruled the approvals of that work were invalidated when the agency violated the open meetings act.

The lawsuit alleges the turnpike authority illegally paid more than $67 million on ACCESS Oklahoma, most of it to engineering firms led by or employing past state transportation engineers.

The turnpike authority is fighting the suit. Several engineering firms filed a challenge to Olsen hearing the case alleging he is unable to conduct a fair hearing. Labarthe is awaiting a decision by Olsen on whether the challenge, which Labarthe expects will be appealed to the supreme court if Olsen turns down the request for a new judge. The taxpayer lawsuit requests millions paid to the engineering firms and consultants be repaid to the turnpike authority.

The taxpayer lawsuit is ongoing.

Legislative reform efforts

Lawmakers filed several bills seeking to curtail the power of the turnpike authority, but only one bill, House Bill 2263, authorized by Rep. Danny Sterling, was passed into law after overcoming a veto by Stitt.

The turnpike authority board, which has yet to cast a “no” vote, or challenge ACCESS Oklahoma, consists of six members all appointed by the governor. The bill, passed through a legislative override of the governor's veto, divides the appointment power between the House speaker, Senate president pro tempore and the governor.

Turnpike authority Chairman Gene Love said he opposes the bill. He changed the format of the board meetings to allow the public to follow discussions that he said were taking place in board committee meetings. The language of the bill makes it unlikely the changes will weaken gubernatorial power of the board appointments until after the end of Stitt's second term.

This article originally appeared on Oklahoman: What happens following court approval of ACCESS Oklahoma?