Who paid for over-designed bridge for bikes?

Who paid for over-designed bridge for bikes?

I have read several articles in the Northwest Arkansas Democrat-Gazette recently on the newly constructed bikeway bridge at New Hope Road in Rogers. None of the articles mention the project's cost nor where the funds came from.

I am in favor of providing safe recreational facilities/activities here in Rogers and the bike paths are definitely used extensively. However, instead of a simple single-span bridge (like the dozens of other bridges constructed throughout the Razorback Greenway) this project consists of a triple-span bridge complete with a covered gazebo-style central "viewing area." Since Mayor Greg Hines is mentioned in the articles, one must assume the taxpayers of Rogers are paying for such an expensive and over-designed project.

Does anyone care about a project's cost when spending public funds?

George Martin

Rogers

Editor's note: According to city of Rogers spokesman Ben Cline, the $1.2 million bike/pedestrian bridge was funded with three federal Transportation Alternative Program grants totaling $945,199. The remainder, $254,801, was paid out of a Walton Family Foundation grant to the city of Rogers.

City finds it easy to spend other people's money

The new trail bridge at New Hope and the freeway is shaped as a "Y" with a very expensive center section. The bridge did not need to be built as a "Y," but could have been built as a straight-line bridge with a plain center support. Building the bridge as a "Y" saves the pedestrian approximately 75 feet in each direction. I thought the main idea of the trail was for exercise.

The cost difference between this "Y" bridge vs. a straight-line bridge is over $300,000. Yes, $300,000! The trail system, on average, cost over $1 million per mile, yet less than 10 percent of the citizenry of Northwest Arkansas use the trail.

This "Y" bridge is a complete waste of taxpayer money. The mayor should be ashamed to have christened this exotic, exorbitant spending of taxpayer money. The designer should lose his or her job and so should the designer's boss, since it is very obvious they do not care about how much things cost.

Yes, it was a grant, but it is still taxpayer money.

Mike Clifford

Bentonville

Business leaders comprehend what Congress doesn't

I read with interest your Dec. 16 article "Global group gathers, talks environmental sustainability." According to the reporting, this Little Rock event, the Global Solutions Summit, gathered "global leaders of governments, nonprofits, businesses and financial institutions" to focus on financing development projects and emphasizing sustainability, whether here in Arkansas or as far afield as India.

As the U.S. Congress continues to ignore passing significant carbon reduction legislation (e.g. economically stimulating Carbon Fee and Dividend), the private business sector is emerging as a leader in demanding and enacting climate salvaging initiatives. The Little Rock summit gives a powerful example. Another occurred in November, when hundreds of corporations including Hilton, General Mills, and Hewlett Packard issued an open letter to Donald Trump, President Obama and Congress to uphold America's Paris Agreement commitments.

What do these business leaders understand that Congress doesn't seem to get? An answer was given in August 2016 by Mark Wilson, CEO of international insurer Aviva. Calling on the G20 to eliminate fossil fuel subsidies, Wilson described climate change as representing "the mother of all risks -- to businesses and to society as a whole."

Arkansas Congressman Steven Womack's website contains the inspiring phrase "Lead by Example/Lead from the Front." Sometimes I imagine the carbon dioxide emission reductions and robust green economic growth that could occur if senators and representatives would act on the congressman's tagline and dare to pass common-sense climate legislation. Meanwhile, I am grateful for initiatives like the Global Summit.

Jan Schaper

Eureka Springs