Trinity Vision
#1
Posted 28 March 2007 - 02:03 AM
Not trying to start a huge discussion, but if anyone was there I'd like to hear what they thought. Anything new in the pipeline? How was the Yellowtail? They've been spending a large amount of time on the offices (bottom floor of Commerce Building), and blanking out a lot of windows. Does the space look good? Any reason for less transparency than when the same space was an actual bank, handling money?
I'm not against the project, really. I just wish that we'd divert some of the water to clean the Augean stables.
#2
Posted 28 March 2007 - 07:59 AM
#3
Posted 28 March 2007 - 09:53 AM
Better Business Bureau: A place to find or post valid complaints for auto delerships and maintenance facilities. (New Features) If you have a valid gripe about auto dealerships, this is the place to voice it.
#4
Posted 29 March 2007 - 07:08 PM
#5
Posted 17 October 2007 - 10:11 AM
A Trinity tug of war
Dallas lawmaker stalls funding for Fort Worth's river project
By MARIA RECIO
Star-Telegram Staff Writer
WASHINGTON -- For the first time in seven years, Congress has approved a massive $23.2 billion water projects bill that includes years of backed-up requests for flood control projects and improvements to rivers and harbors by the Army Corps of Engineers.
The bill includes funds for an $80 million Johnson Creek restoration project in Arlington, but there is something missing from Tarrant County's wish list: funding for a key aspect of Fort Worth's Trinity River Vision project. That's the city's $435 million showcase effort to redesign itself by creating an urban waterfront on the Trinity River, opening it to recreation, green spaces and residential and commercial development.
The tangled tale involves some political miscalculations, confusion over the changing nature of the project and the always baffling congressional funding process.
Rep. Kay Granger, R-Fort Worth, the central figure in the case, has worked tirelessly to promote the project in recent years. But this year she ran into a formidable obstacle: Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson, D-Dallas, the new chairwoman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee's Water Resources and Environment Subcommittee.
The roadblock put up by Johnson is unlikely to stall Fort Worth's project for long. But it's a reality check and a reminder that nothing is certain in Congress and that local opposition to a local project can make things more difficult. Tarrant County Democrats oppose the project, and they are taking their complaints to new House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.
Granger and others pushing for Trinity River Vision are confident that they will prevail and get full funding for Fort Worth's signature project.
Read the rest of the story here.
#6
Posted 17 October 2007 - 10:13 AM
By Maria Recio
Star-Telegram Staff Writer
ART BRENDER WASHINGTON -- The Trinity River Vision project is under attack from Tarrant County Democrats, who sent a scathing letter Oct. 11 to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., complaining about "cronyism" surrounding the federally-supported project as local officials spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on Washington lobbyists to promote it.
"Tarrant County Democrats are concerned that the Trinity River Vision is nothing more than a scheme to enrich Rep. Granger's political supporters and the local Republican Party," wrote Art Brender, chairman of the Tarrant County Democratic Party.
Brender said in an interview that the party's executive committee voted unanimously in June to oppose the $450 million flood control and urban redevelopment project unless it is revamped. About 150 of the 300 executive committee members were present for the vote, Brender said.
The letter takes aim at Rep. Kay Granger, R-Fort Worth, who has championed the flood control project, the hiring of her son, J. D. Granger, as executive director and the awarding of $1.9 million in no-bid consulting contracts to Republican consultant Bryan Eppstein of Fort Worth.
Read the Rest of the Story Here.
#7
Posted 17 October 2007 - 10:18 AM
#8
Posted 17 October 2007 - 10:38 AM
--
Kara B.
#9
Posted 17 October 2007 - 11:01 AM
I want to see the project move forward too, but as I said when I ran for the board last year, I don't think we're doing it right.
It is a little disingenuous of the local Dem party to try to smear the Reps with this project when some of the beneficiaries are from their own party.
Maybe if the Dems strengthen control of both houses and regain control of the White House next year, Kay Granger could switch parties again to keep the pork flowing.
#10
Posted 17 October 2007 - 11:33 AM
I have to say that the appointment of J.D. Granger was a mistake, at least before the fundng was secured. He probably is qualified for the job but, if I was in Kay Granger's shoes I would have told my son to look elsewhere for a job. It just looks bad on the surface and opened the whole project to the cronyism charge.
Let's hope the city doesn't build those new bridges over the spot where the channel may or may not someday exist.
I hope Kay can do a better job bringing home some transit money.
#11
Posted 17 October 2007 - 01:49 PM
She is blocking our Trinity project but is fully supporting and securing funds for the Dallas project? WTF!?!?!
Now I know everyone, has their thoughts on TRV and I have my own (not all good and rosey by the way) but when some POS from Dallas starts screwing with our project for all the obvious reasons while fully supporting her own project. Well that is when we (Fort Worth) need to draw the line in the sand and go to war with this (Not very nice name)!
Washington, D.C
1511 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-8885
Fax: (202) 226-1477
District Office
Dallas Office:
3102 Maple Avenue
Suite 600
Dallas, TX 75201
Phone: (214) 922-8885
I am trying to calm myself first down for when I call her office and write the first of many letters.
#12
Posted 17 October 2007 - 03:35 PM
Plenty of story to deal with here, am interested on F Johnson's take with the Dallas Project. I say increase the County Sales tax and make it happen over another 12 years time. BLOW any Dallas Project out of the metroplex! What do ya say? Another .35% to sales tax will do.
UTSA is doing the SAME thing (but with tuition increase)for bringing in an NCAA football program. SUCKERS!
What is meant by "revamped". To make favorable to one side or party???
I feel your pain Adam, and I know that this scenario would come to quite a blow with your property values, but let's ALL CALM DOWN here.
Well who exactly is going to present the alternative or TRUTH here. They must be doing a Tony Romo and scrambling about.
www.iheartfw.com
#13
Posted 17 October 2007 - 03:40 PM
#14
Posted 17 October 2007 - 04:27 PM
--
Kara B.
#15
Posted 17 October 2007 - 07:33 PM
Um, hey SAFly... Her name is Eddie Bernice. When AdamB said F Johnson, I think he meant the pejorative sense - like F%$* Johnson.
A chick named EDDIE??? Ok, this is really gettin weird.
Am I on the right site here?
Oh wait, I get it now. Like... F! Scott Fitzgerald. Or John F! Kennedy. Or FNA! (Friendly Native Americans). Or FMe! (Find Me!). Or FYaw! (Flight Yaw!). Or FNSOB! (Fasten Ninos Seatbelt On Board!)
Ok. I see now. I think.
www.iheartfw.com
#16
Posted 17 October 2007 - 09:08 PM
Meanwhile, Lake Worth continues to choke on its own silt.
#17
Posted 18 October 2007 - 08:16 AM
Sounds to me like Eddie Bernice is trying to save us from ourselves. But I'm sure that won't stop us from finding some way to stick our children with this albatross.
The way I remember it, the albatross was a sign of good luck, until somebody killed it.
--
Kara B.
#18
Posted 18 October 2007 - 10:20 AM
#19
Posted 18 October 2007 - 11:43 AM
#20
Posted 18 October 2007 - 02:05 PM
It should be done, but done right. and the people in the know or powers that be, KNOW exactly how to do it right, and should avoid making a lil money on the WRONG (If that in fact is what appears to be taking place).
We just desperately need some oversight in the project's guidance. I NEVER agree with "no bid" contracts involving a government entity. Just asking for an article like this. Thanks Kay!
Oh, and Stephen "F!" Austin!
www.iheartfw.com
#22
Posted 18 October 2007 - 02:22 PM
#23
Posted 18 October 2007 - 02:30 PM
#24
Posted 18 October 2007 - 04:48 PM
#25
Posted 18 October 2007 - 05:59 PM
I think I may have that one in my collection.
I always felt a bit uneasy and conflicted about listening to Mr. James Gideon of Gideon-Toal articulating the plans and objectives for the TRV Project presentation (while under contract) at the public meetings some 6 years ago.
www.iheartfw.com
#26
Posted 18 October 2007 - 06:43 PM
I have to agree with Johnny. This is an amazing project, and one of the biggest urban development projects *anywhere.* I am eager to get it going.
--
Kara B.
#27
Posted 18 October 2007 - 07:39 PM
#28
Posted 18 October 2007 - 09:06 PM
#29
Posted 19 October 2007 - 02:35 AM
Just bring in more monstrosity condos and good paying jobs, then WE ALL can be proud of what we have. As for levees and the idea of building along them. Am I the only one here who doesn't think that is such a great idea. Planning wise? And then the practice of it too.
It is the greatest and most ambitious urban projects in the country for that matter. But anytime I mention the TR Project to my counterparts and colleagues down in S and C Texas, they mention the Dallas one. And not that they are confused about the differences between FW and Dallas, that distinction they are aware of, but as far as TR projects, it's the Dallas one that is the buzz or that they do recall. Are we not being taken serious enough over here?
Maybe it would be in the BEST INTEREST (BIG IDEA HERE, WATCHOUT!) to showcase this project and what it means to a city of our size and our growth, in having this onboard when the next Congress/House and Executive Representatives are elected. As in tour them to the spot and at the Gas and Oil building that showcases the model(s). Ride this project on the coattails of both Democrat and Republican Presidential candidates alike. BASICALLY, put this mother on the national spotlight!
Now my target of influence may lean a lil bit LEFT on presenting this and making a statement with a particular national candidate. But if a Democratic Presidential Candidate can see the value in this, then the PRO QUO would be to FASTRACK this project if HE or SHE gets the N.Texas Voters Constituents nod. As in this State turning COMPLETELY "BLUE" come election night. The BUZZ in the media would not be able to contain themselves and then they would of course look more into the matter until Inauguration time and then THIS TRV Project would just HAVE TO be brought to the national spotlight. In fact, I'd love for the TRV to have it's own Inaugural Day float revving down PA Ave.
Alright FWF'ers, pick a Republican and a Democrat to sing and dance this to. Opportunity is a knocking and the Election Day Clock is a ticking.
Poll Time!
www.iheartfw.com
#30
Posted 08 November 2007 - 04:06 PM
Thursday, Nov 8, 2007
Posted on Thu, Nov. 08, 2007
Congress hands Bush first veto override
By CHARLES BABINGTON
Associated Press Writer
President Bush suffered the first veto override of his seven-year-old presidency Thursday as the Senate enacted a $23 billion water resources bill despite his protest that it was filled with unnecessary projects.
The 79-14 vote included 34 Republicans who defied the president. Enactment was a foregone conclusion, but it still marked a milestone for a president who spent his first six years with a much friendlier Congress controlled by his Republican Party.
Now he confronts a more hostile, Democratic-controlled legislature, and Thursday's vote showed that most of the Republicans will defy him on spending matters dear to their political careers.
Bush's spokeswoman portrayed the issue as a divide between a budget-conscious president and a big-spending Congress.
"The president is standing up for the taxpayers," White House press secretary Dana Perino said. "No one is surprised that this veto is overridden. We understand that members of Congress are going to support the projects in their districts. Budgeting is about making choices and defining priorities - it doesn't mean you can have everything. This bill doesn't make the difficult choices; it says we can fund every idea out there. That's not a responsible way to budget."
The bill funds hundreds of Army Corps of Engineers projects, such as dams, sewage plants and beach restoration, that are important to local communities and their representatives. It also includes money for the hurricane-hit Gulf Coast and for Florida Everglades restoration efforts.
The House voted 361-54 to override the veto Tuesday. Both votes easily exceeded the two-thirds majority needed in each chamber to negate a presidential veto.
The last such veto override happened when Congress dealt President Clinton the second of his two overrides in February 1998.
Bush vetoed no bills during his first five years in office. He has since vetoed a stem cell research bill twice, an Iraq spending bill that set guidelines for troop withdrawals, and a children's health insurance bill. House and Senate Republicans managed to sustain those vetoes.
But they broke ranks on the Water Resources Development Act, or WRDA, which Bush vetoed on Nov. 2, calling it too expensive. Thirty-four Republicans voted with the 43 Democrats and two independents to override the veto. Two Democrats, Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri and Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, voted with 12 Republicans to sustain Bush's veto.
His supporters have noted that the Army Corps has a backlog of $58 billion worth of projects and an annual budget of about $2 billion to address them.
The bill, the first water system restoration and flood control authorization passed by Congress since 2000, would cost $11.2 billion over the next four years, and $12 billion in the 10 years after that, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
Flood protection projects along the Gulf Coast, including 100-year levee protection in New Orleans, would cost about $7 billion if fully funded. The bill approves projects but does not fund them.
Some of Bush's most ardent allies argued for the override. "This bill is enormously important, and it has been a long time coming," said Sen. David Vitter, R-La., whose state was hammered by Hurricane Katrina two years ago.
The bill "is one of the few areas where we actually do something constructive," said Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott, R-Miss. What Bush sees as pork barrel items, Lott said, "are good, deserved, justified projects."
"Almost every president opposes this type of bill," he said.
Democrats are sure to remind such Republicans of their rejection of Bush's budgetary concerns when debate turns to several spending bills he also vows to veto.
Democrats, frustrated by their inability to force Bush's hand on Iraq and other matters, clearly enjoyed their victory Thursday. Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., said the message to the White House was, "you can't keep rolling over us like this."
The bill would authorize the construction of navigation improvements for the Upper Mississippi River, at an estimated federal cost of $1.9 billion, and an ecosystem restoration project for the Upper Mississippi costing $1.7 billion.
The Indian River Lagoon project in the Florida Everglades would be funded at about $700 million.
The bill calls for an independent peer review process of all Army Corps projects costing $45 million or more, a bid to cut down on wasteful spending.
#31
Posted 08 November 2007 - 04:43 PM
"The president is standing up for the taxpayers," White House press secretary Dana Perino said. "No one is surprised that this veto is overridden. We understand that members of Congress are going to support the projects in their districts. Budgeting is about making choices and defining priorities - it doesn't mean you can have everything. This bill doesn't make the difficult choices; it says we can fund every idea out there. That's not a responsible way to budget."
The bill funds hundreds of Army Corps of Engineers projects, such as dams, sewage plants and beach restoration, that are important to local communities and their representatives. It also includes money for the hurricane-hit Gulf Coast and for Florida Everglades restoration efforts.
Interesting take on spending by the Admin.???
www.iheartfw.com
#32
Posted 08 November 2007 - 05:24 PM
#33
Posted 06 January 2008 - 09:28 AM
#34
Posted 06 January 2008 - 10:20 AM
Better Business Bureau: A place to find or post valid complaints for auto delerships and maintenance facilities. (New Features) If you have a valid gripe about auto dealerships, this is the place to voice it.
#35
Posted 08 January 2008 - 02:58 PM
Winter 2008 TRV Newsletter (PDF)
I still fail to understand why the property was sold exclusively to Carl Bell and not put up for auction to all interested bidders. IMHO, this is the continuing corporate welfare state that the city has been practicing.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users