Sunday, June 15, 2003

By Staff
Another response on interchange controversy
To the editor:
This is my response to MDOT Commissioner Dick Hall's letter of June 2.
Meridian and Lauderdale County are blessed with wonderful patriotic, friendly people who desire to become well-informed citizens. We have many who are especially interested in governmental issues and projects when they affect or may affect our lives, such as economic development, increased taxes, wasteful spending, eminent domain, et cetera.
Recently, the city of Meridian's chief administrative officer, Ken Storms, stated: "The purpose of government is to protect and serve the people or else it should get out of the way." These are true words indeed, but become difficult to believe when certain leaders dodge our questions. Such dodging only leads to suspicion. Allow me to illustrate.
As you recall, my letter to you was written with the request for answers to three specific questions. My first question was to know who selected the terribly costly proposed interchange site near Hawkins Crossing Road, which is over two miles from the industrial park in the middle of the Great Southern Development Inc. Park, and which is owned by a group of East Mississippi Business Development gentlemen?
On May 30, Mayor John Robert Smith, while a guest on the popular WMOX radio talk show, received a phone call from me. I asked him lucidly who chose that site three times! Each time he dodged the simple question like you did in your letter to me.
Furthermore, on June 2, Mr. Storms was on the WALT radio talk show. Former Mayor Jimmy Kemp asked him about this same controversial interchange site. He, too, dodged the question by passing the buck stating it was the mayor's undertaking; i.e. that he was spearheading that project with a "team" of BDC (East Mississippi Business Development Corporation.) He would not comment further on that subject. I can provide you with more examples of this "dodging" if you desire.
My second question to you pertained to the mysterious proposed four-lane road traversing south of the new interchange site away from the industrial park through about of quarter of a mile of the Great South Development park, across Bonita Drive and intersecting with Highway 19 South? All of which crosses privately-owned land which would also have to be acquired through purchase or eminent domain.
Many of us feel this mysterious road has no need to our industrial park since Highway 19 South already connects to I-20/59 via Highway 45. Residents of that area have been told nothing from the city about this road and are upset about it. You also failed to refer to this second question as well.
My third simple question was why can't "they" place the interchange near where Sweet Gum Bottom Road intersects I-20/59, which is an ideal site and cost-efficient. Only to this one question of my three did you even reply, but with only one sentence "A new interchange could not be constructed off I-20 at Sweet Gum Bottom Road due to FHWA's three-mile spacing requirement on rural interstate." Please allow me to reply to your one-sentence explanation. Since I am not an engineer, I had to consult on this statement with an objective professional engineer who was well qualified on this subject.
That site is .9 mile up to 1.5 miles east of Highway 45 interchange, well qualifying within FHWA's spacing guidelines within a municipality area. Since this area is also within the "urban expansion" area east of Meridian, it further qualifies for an exemption to the three-mile spacing requirement of rural intestates.
Everyone here in Meridian knows about our urban expansion eastward and northeastward, especially the mayor. You may not know that he is currently attempting to annex that area which includes along I-20/59. It is possible that someone did not inform you about this, that our urban expansion also goes east of Meridian along I-20/59 and Highway 11/80.
We even have large attractive residential developments in that county area. Our mayor seems determined to annex that area, apparently believing it qualifies to become part of the city. Our urban expansion actually extends all the way to Russell and beyond. Again, this clearly qualifies the Sweet Gum Bottom Road site for an exemption to the three mile spacing guideline.
In closing, there are many more suspicious activities connected to the selection of the popularly unfavorable and costly Hawkins Crossing site, giving the strong appearance of impropriety at best. If you wish to become more informed of these activities, please do not hesitate to let me know.
Thank you for your letter and please remember "… to serve the people …" who own the $5,000,000 industrial park and relocate the interchange site back to our park. Our citizens would be most grateful to you.
Roy Hurst
Meridian