Trinity River Vision
I suppose we should revel in the fact that the Trinity River Vision, “the massive flood control and economic development project,” “is on time and on budget.” (See Oct. 11 news story, “Trinity River Vision moving forward, building 3 bridges.”)
Except that it is neither.
The original cost was $367 million, and most of the milestones have been delayed.
In 2005, the re-estimated cost was $435 million and that included additional money for inflation.
The 2009 figure was $908 million, also with a cushion for inflation.
So much for “on time and on budget.”
The “massive flood control” is not to enable development, but is a byproduct of the development to avoid greater flooding in Arlington and Dallas.
That adds big costs (and those cities should still be concerned).
So, the flood control argument is bogus.
The central city federal share is limited to $110 million, yet the project will require a $340 million appropriation to the Army Corps of Engineers.
How certain and why the increase?
The 2005 budget estimate included $26.6 million from Fort Worth and $115.9 million from the TIF.
That’s all Fort Worth tax money.
Now the TIF estimate is $320 million.
What was a 1:3 cost/benefit ratio has turned into an upside down deal.
Bottom line: The taxpayers are getting “sTIFfed.”
Clyde Picht, Fort Worth
Women in meetings
The Thursday commentary by Alexandra Petri (“Women in meetings with men tend to mince their words”) showed that she believes women in today’s business world are meek, timid and subservient.
To quote from within a quote in her commentary: “Bull----.”
Today’s women are forthright and succinct.
They bring to meetings a perspective often missed by men and greatly contribute to positive outcomes.
I note that Petri writes The Washington Post’s ComPost blog.
Her piece deserves to be on the compost pile.