Regional boost

Regarding “We’d better get used to low prices for oil, gas” (Page B1, March 12), Chris Tomlinson’s column is perceptive and on point. He reported that 80 percent of the new electricity generation projects commissioned in 2016 are renewable energy projects, that Tesla will bring down electric vehicle costs, and that less wealth and fewer jobs are in Houston’s future if the city doesn’t diversify its economy more.

All that leads me to ask, why has the leadership of our city — the mayor, the Greater Houston Partnership, Rice University, et al. — not spoken out against the terrible disservice that the University of Houston’s powers have done to our city in sabotaging the University of Texas’ efforts to establish a presence here? (“UT halts expansion plans here,” Page A1, March 2). And what has the leadership done to support UT in the face of this misguided opposition?

UT coming to Houston would have been one of the best long-term, impactful concepts to happen here since NASA came in the ’60s and since Shell moved its headquarters here in the ’70s. Every city in the country would give its right arm to have such a presence. Its probable failure is the worst event, in my opinion, since Enron’s demise.

UH’s opposition is like Harvard saying to MIT, “You can’t come to Boston.” Or Stanford opposing UC Berkley establishing itself in the Bay Area. We know what those institutions have meant to the long-term health of those areas.

Is the effort dead? I have heard varying opinions. What I do know is that UT has bought and paid for most of the land, so I’m an optimist. But it is going to take a strong, concerted and immediate effort to turn this thing around. In view of the issues pointed out regarding the energy industry as well as the apparent challenges in the Medical Center, we very much need a win!

David S. Wolff, Houston