U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > West Virginia > Morgantown
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-27-2014, 08:14 PM
 
Location: Mount Morris, PA
273 posts, read 324,016 times
Reputation: 108

Advertisements

I remember listening to a conversation on WAJR with someone at the state level. I don't remember if it was the DOH or somewhere else. They basically said, "Of course Morgantown could restrict truck traffic in downtown. Why wouldn't they be able to."
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-27-2014, 08:31 PM
 
10,148 posts, read 13,280,744 times
Reputation: 1782
Quote:
Originally Posted by fuji2086 View Post
I remember listening to a conversation on WAJR with someone at the state level. I don't remember if it was the DOH or somewhere else. They basically said, "Of course Morgantown could restrict truck traffic in downtown. Why wouldn't they be able to."
Please... that sounds like another poster here. Saying it can be done and getting it done are two entirely different things. Maybe if you had people using it in trucks who didn't care one way or the other, or people who lacked the motivation to fight for their rights, you could pull it off. That is so far from the case here there is no comparison. The principal individual involved here has an $80+ million war chest and he has repeatedly proven he isn't one bit shy about using it. He literally has legions of lawyers. He also employees 1,000 local people, and has enormous clout in his own right. It won't change until he says it will change, and that won't be until the state makes it plausible from his perspective. Take that to the bank.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-28-2014, 08:15 AM
 
124 posts, read 133,773 times
Reputation: 63
No question this issue will end up in court. However, the big difference this time is virtually all of the businesses in the downtown area want the trucks re-routed. No one supports the trucks except the truck owners and employees of Greer. While Raese and Greer have money, no one takes them serious anymore. His unsuccessful political campaigns over the last 30 years in conjunction with his legal war with WVU have made Raese a villain in most people's eyes. His own paper reported his lawyers may face ethics or bar violations for the public smear campaign against Oliver Luck, Gordon Gee, etc.

In my opinion here is what is different this time about the truck traffic:
-The public and downtown businesses are against the trucks
-The trucks are obstructing other lanes of traffic at Pleasant, Spruce, and Walnut
-DOH has admitted the gravel trucks are causing 90% of the damage to Morgantown streets
-The city and DOH has admitted the dirt and grime on the houses and buildings along Brockway come from the Gravel trucks
-DOH admits Greenbag road was built to keep large trucks from passing through downtown (greenbag cement company)
-A group of prominent downtown lawyers have met and agreed to provide their service free to the City
-The DOH has admitted it is possible to re-designate and re-route Rt. 7 to Greenbag Rd.
-Even the "right leaning" politicians are now saying the trucks need another route
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-28-2014, 11:42 AM
 
10,148 posts, read 13,280,744 times
Reputation: 1782
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frog72 View Post
No question this issue will end up in court. However, the big difference this time is virtually all of the businesses in the downtown area want the trucks re-routed. No one supports the trucks except the truck owners and employees of Greer. While Raese and Greer have money, no one takes them serious anymore. His unsuccessful political campaigns over the last 30 years in conjunction with his legal war with WVU have made Raese a villain in most people's eyes. His own paper reported his lawyers may face ethics or bar violations for the public smear campaign against Oliver Luck, Gordon Gee, etc.

In my opinion here is what is different this time about the truck traffic:
-The public and downtown businesses are against the trucks
-The trucks are obstructing other lanes of traffic at Pleasant, Spruce, and Walnut
-DOH has admitted the gravel trucks are causing 90% of the damage to Morgantown streets
-The city and DOH has admitted the dirt and grime on the houses and buildings along Brockway come from the Gravel trucks
-DOH admits Greenbag road was built to keep large trucks from passing through downtown (greenbag cement company)
-A group of prominent downtown lawyers have met and agreed to provide their service free to the City
-The DOH has admitted it is possible to re-designate and re-route Rt. 7 to Greenbag Rd.
-Even the "right leaning" politicians are now saying the trucks need another route
You aren't getting the point at all. It doesn't matter what people think. It does not matter one bit what the business owners want, or the majority of people want, or what I want for that matter (and I would like to have them rerouted). What matters is Mr. Raese and the 300 truckers who travel on that road have as much right as the rest of us to do use that road. It matters not one bit what the right leaning politicos want, or what DOH admits. The rights of the minority are absolutely protected in the Constitution, and there is good reason for that. The fact that Raese is quite willing to take on the Board of Governors of the school (it doesn't even cost him anything to do that ... he has a staff of lawyers on hand) should tell you that he will not hesitate to take it to court. He can afford it. The City of Morgantown can not afford it. I can assure that those who matter (the court and the city) will take Raese and his money seriously.

Another thing I should point out to you ... how can you say his political campaigns were unsuccessful? The way I see it they were enormously successful. He might not have won the races, but quite likely that was not his only goal. In running, he forced the opposition party to expend enormous sums of money to counter his arguments, thus strengthening the hands of numerous candidates in his party in the elections. Many of those candidates did win their races. So by running, whether he won or lost, the case could be made that he won.


I know I've pointed this out before, but you must have missed it. Raese has NOT smeared Gordon Gee. He has a history of positive relations with Gordon Gee from the years he was in Morgantown before. You have not heard one word of criticism of Gee from Raese. It was the previous President with whom he had the issue, and the politically appointed Board of Governors... not Gee. I think it is obvious that he unfortunately is not a Luck supporter. He also had good relations with the previous athletic administration. But that situation goes way beyond personalities and it has nothing to do with this one. Having Gee there offers hope that a compromise can be reached, because he has no negative history with Gee. The case at hand involves the city but primarily the state... not The University.

That said, Raese is not totally unreasonable. If they can come up with an alternative plan that doesn't put him too far out of the way, I'm sure he would agree to that. That means the state has to get involved. The bozos on City Council do not have the resources or the authority to deal with the solution.

Last edited by CTMountaineer; 06-28-2014 at 12:03 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-28-2014, 07:59 PM
 
664 posts, read 926,960 times
Reputation: 328
Quote:
Originally Posted by CTMountaineer View Post
You aren't getting the point at all. It doesn't matter what people think. It does not matter one bit what the business owners want, or the majority of people want, or what I want for that matter (and I would like to have them rerouted). What matters is Mr. Raese and the 300 truckers who travel on that road have as much right as the rest of us to do use that road. It matters not one bit what the right leaning politicos want, or what DOH admits. The rights of the minority are absolutely protected in the Constitution, and there is good reason for that. The fact that Raese is quite willing to take on the Board of Governors of the school (it doesn't even cost him anything to do that ... he has a staff of lawyers on hand) should tell you that he will not hesitate to take it to court. He can afford it. The City of Morgantown can not afford it. I can assure that those who matter (the court and the city) will take Raese and his money seriously.

Another thing I should point out to you ... how can you say his political campaigns were unsuccessful? The way I see it they were enormously successful. He might not have won the races, but quite likely that was not his only goal. In running, he forced the opposition party to expend enormous sums of money to counter his arguments, thus strengthening the hands of numerous candidates in his party in the elections. Many of those candidates did win their races. So by running, whether he won or lost, the case could be made that he won.


I know I've pointed this out before, but you must have missed it. Raese has NOT smeared Gordon Gee. He has a history of positive relations with Gordon Gee from the years he was in Morgantown before. You have not heard one word of criticism of Gee from Raese. It was the previous President with whom he had the issue, and the politically appointed Board of Governors... not Gee. I think it is obvious that he unfortunately is not a Luck supporter. He also had good relations with the previous athletic administration. But that situation goes way beyond personalities and it has nothing to do with this one. Having Gee there offers hope that a compromise can be reached, because he has no negative history with Gee. The case at hand involves the city but primarily the state... not The University.

That said, Raese is not totally unreasonable. If they can come up with an alternative plan that doesn't put him too far out of the way, I'm sure he would agree to that. That means the state has to get involved. The bozos on City Council do not have the resources or the authority to deal with the solution.
Meanwhile on the Cliven Bundy ranch.... sorry Ct, but you are getting away from the point here. If the route can be moved, trucks can be banned -- plain and simple. That is the exact reason that many towns throughout the country have business districts and bypasses (Warren PA, if you need an example). Only trucks that need to go downtown will then go downtown. Those that are not on official business can bypass (those that are carrying lime and gravel to places other than downtown).
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2014, 04:50 PM
 
10,148 posts, read 13,280,744 times
Reputation: 1782
I don't disagree with that. Can you convince state government to move the route and pay for a suitable alternative? And, can you find the money for Morgantown to pick up the cost of maintaining the current route... which is quite significant, going all the way from city limits in Sabraton to the Westover Bridge?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2014, 09:25 PM
 
Location: Mount Morris, PA
273 posts, read 324,016 times
Reputation: 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by CTMountaineer View Post
I don't disagree with that. Can you convince state government to move the route and pay for a suitable alternative? And, can you find the money for Morgantown to pick up the cost of maintaining the current route... which is quite significant, going all the way from city limits in Sabraton to the Westover Bridge?
There's no requirement in state code to offer any type of alternate route. (Alternate routes certainly already exist anyway.)
WV Code §17C-17-12 (c) Local authorities with respect to highways under their jurisdiction may also, by ordinance or resolution, prohibit the operation of trucks or other commercial vehicles, or may impose limitations as to the weight thereof, on designated highways, which prohibitions and limitations shall be designated by appropriate signs placed on such highways.

What that means, in a nutshell, is that while the state maintains the roads, the city has authority to regulate traffic on them. Certainly, restricting heavy truck traffic in residential or business districts would hold up in court.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2014, 08:29 AM
 
124 posts, read 133,773 times
Reputation: 63
I believe the argument in the state code section you cite is "under their jurisdiction." The Greer and truck side will say only the state has jurisdiction over route 7. The other side will say it is clear as glass.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2014, 12:30 PM
 
10,148 posts, read 13,280,744 times
Reputation: 1782
Quote:
Originally Posted by fuji2086 View Post
There's no requirement in state code to offer any type of alternate route. (Alternate routes certainly already exist anyway.)
WV Code §17C-17-12 (c) Local authorities with respect to highways under their jurisdiction may also, by ordinance or resolution, prohibit the operation of trucks or other commercial vehicles, or may impose limitations as to the weight thereof, on designated highways, which prohibitions and limitations shall be designated by appropriate signs placed on such highways.

What that means, in a nutshell, is that while the state maintains the roads, the city has authority to regulate traffic on them. Certainly, restricting heavy truck traffic in residential or business districts would hold up in court.
That is not what it means in a nutshell. The fact that state code doesn't require an alternate route is not the issue. This is not a matter of state law. It is a matter of Constitutional law, which takes precedence over state law. If the state maintains a route, citizens can not be deprived transit on it. If restrictions are imposed, then the state has a responsibility to provide a suitable alternative. What you are looking at here is if Morgantown tries to impose those restrictions on a state or federal numbered/maintained roadway, the state has to agree to a suitable alternative and agree to provide adequate maintenance for it. They can not avoid that responsibility, because they can not deprive citizens of their Constitutional right of free transit, thus they must agree to the restrictions. The nutshell is, cities have a right to impose restrictions as long as the state agrees to the repercussions of those restrictions on state numbered roads.

If Morgantown attempts to do this on a state or federal numbered highway, the affected parties will be in court faster than you can shake a stick. The outcome is not likely to be favorable to the city, and the city just signed a new contract with a lawyer to represent them in legal matters at a "discounted" rate of $295 per hour. You're talking $3,000 per day in lawyer fees for Morgantown for every day the matter drags on... preparation time, motion time court time, appeals time, etc. That adds up very quickly, and the city is already on a tight budget. Raese and the truckers union have lawyers on staff. It costs them virtually nothing to proceed, and they are almost certain to win. I realize that the city's best and brightest are not to be found in our city government, but I highly doubt they will go forward with this unless they can convince state government to do their part, and that is like trying to move a mountain with a shovel.

Also, the state could abrogate any serious responsibility in the matter by simply abandoning state maintenance on the affected roadway and moving the road around the affected area, which probably would not increase their cost in a major way. The problem with that is now Morgantown must pick up total responsibility to maintain 3 miles of heavily used roadway. That is not something to take lightly. Remember, like most towns in our country these days, they can not even afford to fix all the potholes on roads of existing responsibility.

Last edited by CTMountaineer; 06-30-2014 at 12:41 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2014, 01:13 PM
 
664 posts, read 926,960 times
Reputation: 328
Quote:
Originally Posted by CTMountaineer View Post
That is not what it means in a nutshell. The fact that state code doesn't require an alternate route is not the issue. This is not a matter of state law. It is a matter of Constitutional law, which takes precedence over state law. If the state maintains a route, citizens can not be deprived transit on it. If restrictions are imposed, then the state has a responsibility to provide a suitable alternative. What you are looking at here is if Morgantown tries to impose those restrictions on a state or federal numbered/maintained roadway, the state has to agree to a suitable alternative and agree to provide adequate maintenance for it. They can not avoid that responsibility, because they can not deprive citizens of their Constitutional right of free transit, thus they must agree to the restrictions. The nutshell is, cities have a right to impose restrictions as long as the state agrees to the repercussions of those restrictions on state numbered roads.

If Morgantown attempts to do this on a state or federal numbered highway, the affected parties will be in court faster than you can shake a stick. The outcome is not likely to be favorable to the city, and the city just signed a new contract with a lawyer to represent them in legal matters at a "discounted" rate of $295 per hour. You're talking $3,000 per day in lawyer fees for Morgantown for every day the matter drags on... preparation time, motion time court time, appeals time, etc. That adds up very quickly, and the city is already on a tight budget. Raese and the truckers union have lawyers on staff. It costs them virtually nothing to proceed, and they are almost certain to win. I realize that the city's best and brightest are not to be found in our city government, but I highly doubt they will go forward with this unless they can convince state government to do their part, and that is like trying to move a mountain with a shovel.

Also, the state could abrogate any serious responsibility in the matter by simply abandoning state maintenance on the affected roadway and moving the road around the affected area, which probably would not increase their cost in a major way. The problem with that is now Morgantown must pick up total responsibility to maintain 3 miles of heavily used roadway. That is not something to take lightly. Remember, like most towns in our country these days, they can not even afford to fix all the potholes on roads of existing responsibility.
You continue to ramble on about constitutionality --- much like ranchers out west or gun nuts all over -- please show us the court cases that actually demonstrate that judges have interpreted these laws through the narrow lens that you've presented here.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > West Virginia > Morgantown
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top