OKLAHOMA CITY (KFOR) – There are new developments associated to a lawsuit in opposition to the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority for deliberate building in its Access Oklahoma venture, the projected $5 billion, 15-year-long-range turnpike growth venture introduced in February of this yr.
A lawsuit difficult the legality of the bonds filed in May by grassroots group Pike Off OTA in opposition to the company landed in the Oklahoma Supreme Court after the transportation company filed an utility with the Oklahoma Supreme Court for the approval of its first bond difficulty, to not exceed $500 million {dollars}.
A newly filed order Tuesday is asking for supplemental briefs from the events on two core authorized points in preparation for an oral argument earlier than the Oklahoma Supreme Court justices later this month.
“There has been a round of briefs from the parties already. There has been argument before a referee already, now the supreme court has asked for additional information,” stated the lawyer for Pike Off OTA, Rob Norman, saying the request pertains to 2 of the core authorized points in the case.
“[One issue is ]I f there is legislative authorization for the South Extension – The East West Connector and the Tri-City Connector – that go through Cleveland County and parts of Norman,” he added in an interview Friday with KFOR.
“They’ve also asked for legal briefing from the parties on bonding and building restrictions that go beyond whether a turnpike was originally, legally authorized. Our contention is that those bonding and building restrictions would apply to the East West Connector and the Tri- City Connector [and ] that those bonding and building statutes don’t allow the OTA to build the East West Connector and the Tri-City Connector,” he added.
Norman acknowledged that if the OTA wins, they are going to have authorized authority to difficulty bonds for the constructing of recent turnpikes in the Access Oklahoma program, in addition to different initiatives associated to this system.
Alternatively, if the plaintiffs will, the OTA won’t be approved to difficulty bonds for the turnpikes.
“Our contention is they won’t be able to build the turnpikes if we prevail in the Supreme Court Case,” he stated.
Norman stated the upcoming listening to is a uncommon alternative the place the events are literally doing the oral arguments earlier than the justices themselves.
“Everyone thinks this is a good and needed opportunity Here the justices have decided they want to see more briefs and hear more from each side on both the OTA’s position and the legal challenges [and] we feel the Supreme Court is doing a good and welcome thing of giving all parties a fair and welcome things of giving all parties a fair chance for their day in court,” he stated.
Tassie Hirschfeld, one of many plaintiffs in the case, stated based mostly on her analysis, there may be overwhelming proof that the turnpikes have been by no means approved by the state legislature.
“There’s actually evidence of this in [OTA’s] own documents in their 2021 financial report,” she stated.
“They list all of the term terms and then they list when they were authorized by the state legislature, except for the Kickapoo where they say it was authorized by the board, by their board [but] the board does not have that power. All of the turnpikes must be authorized by the legislature. They just decided they didn’t have to follow that rule. And I’m very hopeful and optimistic that they’re going to learn the hard way that you do have to follow that rule,” added Hirschfeld.
“It’s not that we’re anti transportation or anti-development, but the process matters [and] people should not be able to take your home without following due process,” she continued.
“I am very confident that all the evidence supports our case [while] their case consists of their attorneys saying we get to do whatever we want. We can put a turnpike wherever we want, and nobody has the right to impose any restrictions, and I think that rubs everybody in Oklahoma the wrong way.”
In an announcement to KFOR, the OTA stated they’re “supportive of the [Supreme Court’s] process to ultimately provide clarity on the issue.”
The order requires that the attorneys for each side file their written arguments no later than November 18th.
Both sides are set to go earlier than the Supreme Court for oral arguments throughout a bond validation listening to on November 28 to find out if the transportation company can difficulty the bonds and transfer ahead with building.
put up credit score to Source link