Denied money for Panther Island is maddening. Can’t Texas senators help Fort Worth out?
The latest developments on Panther Island — the federal government’s refusal to provide funding beyond a token amount for a needlessly repetitive study and more delays and additional costs for bridge construction — are frustrating, no doubt, for local officials and particularly for local business owners in limbo over the bridges.
But worse, they contribute to the cynicism and overwrought accusations of corruption around what remains a vital flood protection project for Fort Worth.
The funding impasse in particular has sparked discussion of different ways to move the project forward. But here’s the irritating truth: There is no practical alternative to federal dollars when it comes to digging the bypass channel that would provide a new path for Trinity River water and create an urban island.
Mayor Betsy Price wants to get private investors and developers involved in hopes of striking a public-private partnership that could spur development. But it would take a most-optimistic developer to see a way to generate enough profit to justify the needed millions to dig the river channel. Besides, local taxpayers have put plenty of money into this project already.
BEHIND THE STORY
MOREHey, who writes these editorials?
Editorials are the positions of the Editorial Board, which serves as the Fort Worth Star-Telegram’s institutional voice. The members of the board are: Cynthia M. Allen, columnist; Steve Coffman, editor and president; Bud Kennedy, columnist; Ryan J. Rusak, opinion editor; and Nicole Russell, editorial writer and columnist. Most editorials are written by Rusak or Russell. Editorials are unsigned because they represent the board’s consensus positions, not the views of individual writers.
Read more by clicking the arrow in the upper right.
How are topics and positions chosen?
The Editorial Board meets regularly to discuss issues in the news and what points should be made in editorials. We strive to build a consensus to produce the strongest editorials possible, but when we differ, we put matters to a vote.
The board aims to be consistent with stances it has taken in the past but usually engages in a fresh discussion based on new developments and different perspectives.
We focus on local and state news, though we will also weigh in on national issues with an eye toward their impact on Texas or the Dallas-Fort Worth area.
How are these different from news articles or signed columns?
News reporters strive to keep their opinions out of what they write. They have no input on the Editorial Board’s stances. The board consults their reporting and expertise but does its own research for editorials.
Signed columns by writers such as Allen, Kennedy and Rusak contain the writer’s personal opinions.
How can I respond to an editorial, suggest a topic or ask a question?
We invite readers to write letters to be considered for publication. The preferred method is an email to letters@star-telegram.com. To suggest a topic or ask a question, please email Rusak directly at rrusak@star-telegram.com.
More to the point, such talk could put the focus back on economic development. One of the problems in Washington has been suspicion that flood control was taking a back seat. Leaders of the board overseeing Panther Island have worked for months to counter that perception, undertaking an outside review and bringing in a new coordinator. Bringing private developers to the table could undo those efforts.
After all, it appears the Trump administration needs no further excuse to block the money. Rep. Kay Granger, the project’s long-time champion, told our Editorial Board last week that White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney is the impediment. She contends that he has changed the way the White House budget office (which he also oversees) considers such projects. Mulvaney hasn’t responded.
If Granger, who has decades of experience in the federal appropriations process, is right, it’s time for other Texas lawmakers to get more involved. Panther Island has Congress’ approval, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers long ago said it was necessary to prevent a catastrophic flood in Fort Worth. Sens. John Cornyn and Ted Cruz need to lean on Mulvaney or, if necessary, go to the president they’ve been studious about building ties with.
After all, as Granger and other project proponents note, the idea of building the bypass channel has been studied to death. The $1.5 million appropriated for another study may be small change in the gargantuan federal budget, but waste is waste. There’s no new information to be gleaned from another review.
As for the bridges, at least more delays and an added $20 million can’t delay the digging of the channel any further. That’s small consolation to the business owners who’ve lost customers because of construction.
Over the rest of the year, local officials must continue to bang the drum for important flood control work. They must push for whatever local work can be done. After all, momentum counts.
As for the bigger picture, it’s fine to explore alternative ideas, but calls to abandon or greatly alter Panther Island simply don’t make sense right now. Fort Worth, like many cities, has had to wait on big federal projects before. So far, that’s still the prudent, if aggravating, course.