Author: Terri Hall

TURF releases Voter Guide on transportation issues today

Posted on by

IMMEDIATE RELEASE

TURF releases primary election Voter Guide

(Tuesday, February 16, 2010) Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom released its primary election Voter Guide today. The Guide reflects the candidatesʼ positions on transportation issues like the best way to fund roads as well as positions on toll roads, public private partnerships (where private corporations gain control of public infrastructure, called CDAs in Texas), and the Trans Texas Corridor. Candidates are still returning surveys, so TURF expects to update its guide prior to election day, March 2. Itʼs also posted on its web site under “Important Info.”

Is the Trans Texas Corridor still alive?

Confusion persists about whether or not the Trans Texas Corridor is truly “dead” as Rick Perryʼs transportation department announced last year. On February 1, 2010, in a Joint Senate and House Transportation Committee hearing, Senator John Carona directly asked TxDOT Executive Director Amadeo Saenz if TxDOT decided tomorrow that it wants to build the Trans Texas Corridor after all, does it still have the statutory authority to do so? Saenz answered: “Yes.” Watch it here.

At a Transportation Commission work session on August 26, 2009 (scroll down to the end of the transcript), Commissioner Ned Holmes essentially asked that the master development plan CDA for TTC-69 be expedited. For TTC-35, they’re planning to advance a “no build” alternative at this time. Such a move is UNPRECEDENTED. If a project is killed, all they have to do is send a letter to the Federal Highway Administration to notify them they’re withdrawing the project. End of story.

Instead, they’re seeking a Record of Decision on the “no action” alternative. Once they get a Record of Decision from the Federal Highway Administration, the law allows them to change their preferred “alternative” at any time. So if Perry is re-elected, he could easily change back to a “build” alternative and they’re in business. In addition, Ports to Plains and La Entrada de Pacifico are two TTC corridors moving forward unabated.

Tolling existing freeways legal or not?

Thereʼs also questions about whether or not it is legal to convert free highway lanes into toll lanes in the state of Texas, despite Governor Rick Perryʼs claim that it is illegal during the January 29 Republican gubernatorial debate. In an article in the Dallas Morning News February 1, TxDOT spokesman Chris Lippincott stated:

“ʼThe department has made it clear that we have no interest in tolling existing lanes,ʼ Texas Department of Transportation spokesman Chris Lippincott said this afternoon, when told of the Obama budget provision. ʻWhether we are prohibited from doing so in federal law is irrelevant,ʼ he said.

The article goes on to say…

“And it wouldn’t be easy, even if the state’s Transportation Commission didn’t have a policy in place that effectively abides by the moratorium. To turn a freeway (or even a single lane of existing roadway) into a toll road, TEXDOT would need a waiver from the Federal Highway Administration. These are granted only rarely. Then, state law requires approval from the county commissioners and then from a county’s voters.”

Terri Hall, Founder of Texas TURF counters, “Not only is TxDOT planning to toll existing lanes, they’re lying about it. The feds are not only aware of the plans for US 281 in San Antonio in particular, it had already granted clearance until we sued to stop them. So rare or not, the feds granted it.”

Perry’s greatest fib of the January 29 debate was his insistence that the Texas legislature passed a bill in 2005 prohibiting the conversion of free lanes to toll lanes. However, the bill, HB 2702, tells precisely how TxDOT can LEGALLY convert existing highway lanes into toll lanes through 6 exceptions, one that allows a conversion of free lanes by simply downgrading the free lanes to access roads adjacent to the tollway.

Though the language doesnʼt specifically use the term “access roads” to refer to the relocating of free lanes adjacent to the tollway, TxDOT has consistently interpreted the law to mean it has the authority to downgrade freeway lanes to access roads without triggering a public vote based on HB 2702. See the two-part discussion of this law before the Sunset Commission in 2008 here and here. Part-two shows TxDOT Executive Director Amadeo Saenz stating TxDOTʼs interpretation of HB 2702 allows highway lanes to be downgraded to access roads.

The bill also contains a gaping grandfather clause that exempts virtually all the toll projects currently on the table (because they were designated as toll roads in MPO plans prior to September of 2005), so no public vote would be triggered for the dozens of grandfathered toll projects.

“Perry’s elitist ʻyou can eat cakeʼ attitude is this: if you can’t afford the toll lanes, you can sit in congestion on the stop-light ridden access roads. He thinks replacing free highway lanes with access roads is acceptable and his highway department is doing it all over Texas,” says Hall.

The citizensʼ fight to stop the conversion of existing FREEway lanes into toll lanes on US 281 and Loop 1604 in San Antonio, 290 West in Austin, and Hwy 59 in East Texas (part of Trans Texas Corridor TTC-69 thatʼs still alive and well), has languished precisely because of the loopholes in HB 2702.

TURF worked 24/7 in the last session to fix these loopholes. Rep. David Leibowitz of San Antonio introduced a bill to do so and got it attached to the TxDOT sunset bill (but it was stripped in the Senate).

“Texans deserve protection from the DOUBLE TAXATION of converting freeways into tollways. Perry was dead wrong to imply Texans are protected in state law. Theyʼre not, especially for the exempted Trans Texas Corridors, like TTC-69, that will ʻupgradeʼ existing freeways (like Hwy 59) into tollways at the hands of foreign companies,” Hall emphasized.

See detailed proof of the freeway to tollway conversion plans for US 281 on this web site: http://www.281overpassesnow.com.

Portion of HB 2702 that addresses converting existing highways into toll roads –

SECTION 2.36. Chapter 228, Transportation Code, is amended by adding Subchapter E to read as follows: SUBCHAPTER E. LIMITATION ON TOLL FACILITY DETERMINATION; CONVERSION OF NONTOLLED STATE HIGHWAY Sec. 228.201. LIMITATION ON TOLL FACILITY DESIGNATION. Except as provided by Section 228.2015, the department may not operate a nontolled state highway or a segment of a nontolled state highway as a toll project, and may not transfer a highway or segment to another entity for operation as a toll project, unless: (1) the commission by order designated the highway or segment as a toll project before the contract to construct the highway or segment was awarded; (2) the highway or segment was open to traffic as a turnpike project on or before September 1, 2005; (3) the project was designated as a toll project in a plan or program of a metropolitan planning organization on or before September 1, 2005; (4) the highway or segment is reconstructed so that the number of nontolled lanes on the highway or segment is greater than or equal to the number in existence before the reconstruction; (5) a facility is constructed adjacent to the highway or segment so that the number of nontolled lanes on the converted highway or segment and the adjacent facility together is greater than or equal to the number in existence on the converted highway or segment before the conversion; or (6) the commission converts the highway or segment to a toll facility by: (A) making the determination required by Section 228.202; (B) conducting the hearing required by Section 228.203; and (C) obtaining county and voter approval as required by Sections 228.207 and 228.208.

Sec. 228.2015. LIMITATION TRANSITION. (a) Notwithstanding Section 228.201, the department may operate a nontolled state highway or a segment of a nontolled state highway as a toll project if: (1) a construction contract was awarded for the highway or segment before September 1, 2005; (2) the highway or segment had not at any time before September 1, 2005, been open to traffic; and (3) the commission designated the highway or segment as a toll project before the earlier of: (A) the date the highway or segment is opened to traffic; or (B) September 1, 2005. (b) This section expires September 1, 2006.

SECTION 2.37. Section 362.0041, Transportation Code, is transferred to Subchapter E, Chapter 228, Transportation Code, redesignated as Sections 228.202-228.208, and amended to read as follows: Sec. 228.202 [362.0041 ]. COMMISSION DETERMINATION [CONVERSION OF PROJECTS ]. The [(a) Except as provided in Subsections (d) and (g), the ] commission may by order convert a nontolled state highway or a segment of a nontolled state highway [the free state highway system ] to a toll project [facility ] if it determines that the conversion will improve overall mobility in the region or is the most feasible and economic means to accomplish necessary expansion, improvements, or extensions to that segment of the state highway system.

Sec. 228.203. PUBLIC HEARING. [(b) ] Prior to converting a state highway or a segment of a[the ] state highway [ system ] under this subchapter [section ], the commission shall conduct a public hearing for the purpose of receiving comments from interested

persons concerning the proposed conversion [transfer ]. Notice of the hearing shall be published in the Texas Register, one or more newspapers of general circulation, and a newspaper, if any, published in the county or counties in which the involved highway is located. Sec. 228.204. RULES. [(c) ] The commission shall adopt rules implementing this subchapter [section ], including criteria and guidelines for the approval of a conversion of a highway. Sec. 228.205. QUEEN ISABELLA CAUSEWAY. [(d) ] The commission may not convert the Queen Isabella Causeway in Cameron County to a toll project [facility ].

Sec. 228.206. TOLL REVENUE. [(e) Subchapter G, Chapter 361, applies to a highway converted to a toll facility under this section. [(f) ] Toll revenue collected under this section: (1) shall be deposited in the state highway fund;

(2) may be used by the department to finance the improvement, extension, expansion, or operation of the converted segment of highway and may not be collected except for those purposes; and (3) is exempt from the application of Section 403.095, Government Code.

Sec. 228.207. COUNTY AND VOTER APPROVAL. [(g) ] The commission may only convert a state highway or a segment of a[the ] state highway [ system ] under this subchapter [section ] if the conversion is approved by : (1) the commissioners court of each county within which the highway or segment is located ; and (2) the qualified voters who vote in an election under Section 228.208 and who reside in the limits of: (A) a county if any part of the highway or segment to be converted is located in an unincorporated area of the county; or (B) a municipality in which the highway or segment to be converted is wholly located .

Sec. 228.208. ELECTION TO APPROVE CONVERSION. (a) If notified by the department of the proposed conversion of a highway or segment under this subchapter, and after approval of the conversion by the appropriate commissioners courts as required by Section 228.207(1), the commissioners court of each county described by Section 228.207(2)(A) or the governing body of a municipality described by Section 228.207(2)(B), as applicable, shall call an election for the approval or disapproval of the conversion. (b) If a county or municipality orders an election, the county or municipality shall publish notice of the election in a newspaper of general circulation published in the county or municipality at least once each week for three consecutive weeks, with the first publication occurring at least 21 days before the date of the election. (c) An order or resolution ordering an election and the election notice required by Subsection (b) must show, in addition to the requirements of the Election Code, the location of each polling place and the hours that the polls will be open. (d) The proposition submitted in the election must distinctly state the highway or segment proposed to be converted and the limits of that highway or segment. (e) At an election ordered under this section, the ballots shall be printed to permit voting for or against the proposition: “The conversion of (highway) from (beginning location) to (ending location) to a toll project.” (f) A proposed conversion is approved only if it is approved by a majority of the votes cast. (g) A notice of the election and a certified copy of the order canvassing the election results shall be sent to the commission.

-30-

Nichols: Redirect state vehicle sales tax back to funding roads

Posted on by

Link to article here.

Now on this idea, we can agree with Senator Robert Nichols. End ALL diversions NOW!

This TxDOT idea might make too much sense to happen
Ben Wear, Austin American Statesman
Sunday, Feb. 14, 2010

Scan the Texas State Directory and you won’t see very many engineers among the 181 members of the Legislature. There are five, to be exact.

State Sen. Robert Nichols, 65, a Republican now in his fourth year representing Jacksonville , is on that short list. And that helps explain why his legislative style sometimes comes off as quirky in the insular world of the Capitol. Nichols seems to have this crazy idea that if there’s a problem and you find a rational solution to it, well, then maybe that ought to become the law.

Take the looming fiscal train wreck for transportation.

The Texas Department of Transportation last year set a record when it awarded $9.4 billion in contracts, and it has about $4.5 million available annually this year and next, still a healthy amount historically. But then comes trouble, with the department pretty much borrowed out (facing close to a billion dollars in annual debt payments) and the federal stimulus largesse gone.

The rhetorical response to that from most legislators (and gubernatorial candidates, both incumbent and challengers) has been along these lines: Don’t raise the gas tax, don’t build too many toll roads and don’t let the private sector get involved much (Gov. Rick Perry’s views on those last two are a conspicuous exception). Instead, most Texas politicians say, let’s cut waste at TxDOT (always a handy and safely vague suggestion) and end the “diversion” of gas taxes and vehicle registration fees from transportation to the state’s general spending.

Problem is, no one can really put a dollar figure on that presumed TxDOT waste. And even throwing into the transportation kitty the remaining $1.2 billion of diversions every two years would make only a tiny dent in what’s needed to stem urban traffic congestion, maintain existing roads and fulfill ambitious high-speed and urban rail plans.

Enter Nichols.

At a recent joint hearing of the House and Senate transportation committees, Nichols had a suggestion. The state’s 6.25 percent sales tax on vehicle sales generates almost $3 billion a year , money that now goes to general state spending. You could call it a diversion as well. Why don’t we put that money into transportation, Nichols asked.

“I’d be willing to run with it, if you think it’s a good idea,” Nichols said.

Metaphorically speaking, you could hear the crickets chirping at that point.

The problem is that the rest of state government has its own money problems, too. That $6 billion every two years would blow a big hole in the overall budget, one that might have to be filled with higher taxes or fees. Yet, can anyone really argue that selling a F-150 pickup has anything to do with education, or prisons, or social services?

But what does Nichols know? He’s only an engineer.

Grassroots hail Adkisson's anti-toll leadership

Posted on by

Link to article slamming Adkisson here.

Op/Ed on Express-News attack of Good Guy Tommy Adkisson
By Terri Hall

Your editorial attacking the leadership of Commissioner Tommy Adkisson couldn’t be more off-base. Adkisson has jumped-in to defend the disenfranchised in our community by LEADING the way in keeping our freeways toll-free. When thousands of San Antonians have spoken out against toll roads and the appointed and elected officials on the local planning board (MPO) continue to ignore the outcry, Commissioner Adkisson risked his own political hide by standing with the people against the big money in town. One of the politicians who ignored the public outcry against toll roads is one of Adkisson’s opponents, former councilwoman and MPO Chair Sheila McNeil.

Your editorial also got the facts wrong. Adkisson took the helm at the MPO with a major focus on fixing 281 and 1604 without tolls and on improving mass transit. He introduced an amendment to re-instate the EXACT same non-toll plan for 281 that had already been vetted, adopted, and in the MPO plans for 5 years (before Governor Perry’s shift to tolling everything). TxDOT wrongfully claimed this non-toll plan wasn’t properly studied. It is TxDOT’s toll agenda that suddenly made the original overpass and expansion plan for 281 “insufficient.”

It’s also inaccurate to claim Adkisson put the stimulus money and interchange project at risk with his proposals. Adkisson merely proposed doing an equal swap from two pots of money to fulfill TxDOT’s arcane matching fund policies, which are discretionary and optional. Transportation Commission approval of the swap was entirely possible if the board had gotten behind it and spoken with one voice, but instead they chose to cower in the corner at TxDOT’s threats to yank the funds if the MPO dared to return 281 to a non-toll project.

Adkisson then withdrew that part of the proposal well before the board was set to vote on it, and testimony from Alamo Regional Mobility Authority Executive Director Terry Brechtel on the day of the final vote affirmed, on the record, that Adkisson’s non-toll amendments DID NOT jeopardize the stimulus funds or the interchange project in ANY WAY.

So what the Editorial Board calls “ill-considered” was, in reality, a power play by an out of control agency bent on double taxing congestion-weary motorists to use a freeway they’ve already built and paid for. The grassroots of this community hail Commissioner Adkisson’s heroic leadership on transportation issues, and urge the voters of Precinct 4 to re-elect this outstanding visionary.

Terri Hall is the Founder/Director of the non-partisan, grassroots San Antonio Toll Party and an Express-News City Brights blogger.

Toll agency lawyer disbarred

Posted on by

Link to article here.

Nielson is a prime example of the revolving door syndrome that dominates transportation/toll issues. He’s not unlike former State Rep. Mike Krusee who nows lobbies his ex-colleagues for big bucks. These guys just get recycled from one job to the next, using their connections from elected office to exploit taxpayers…

Toll road agency lawyer resigns after bar suspension
Tom Nielson served on Round Rock City Council for six years before joining Central Texas Mobility Authority as general counsel in 2006
By Ben Wear AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF

Monday, Feb. 8, 2010

Tom Nielson, a former Round Rock City Council member and general counsel of the Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority since 2006, quietly left the toll road agency several weeks ago after the State Bar of Texas suspended his law license.

The five-year suspension of Nielson’s right to practice law, for “professional misconduct,” grows out of a 2000 land deal that went awry several years before he became the toll authority’s lawyer, according to a six-page suspension judgment by the bar. Nielson, according to the judgment, falsely claimed to have put $25,000 in a trust account and gave a “false document” to a partner in the deal purporting to show that the money had been deposited with a title company.

Nielson, 49, who officially left his $164,388-a-year position at the toll authority Jan. 15 after his license was suspended Jan. 1, said that although there was a “discrepancy” involving a document, “I still contend there was no issue with it.” The charges confirmed in the Dec. 28 judgment were of the “he-said-she-said” variety, Nielson said.

“Hey, I’ve lost my career,” Nielson said. “But I’m not a bad guy. It’s not like I made off with millions.”

Instead, Nielson said that he and Byron “Dick” Wilson, of Hutto, were “squeezed out” of the sale of land on U.S. 183 near Anderson Mill Road, well south of where the mobility authority would later build the 183-A toll road. Then Wilson sued in 2006, and Nielson said he paid about $50,000 in a settlement in which he didn’t admit guilt.

He also must pay the State Bar almost $6,000 in attorney fees.

Wilson, who in August 2008 filed the grievance with the State Bar that led to the license suspension, could not be reached for comment.

Mobility authority Executive Director Mike Heiligenstein, whose friendship with Nielson goes back two decades to when their children played youth sports together, said he knew nothing about the disputed land deal between Nielson and Wilson.

“It was never brought up during his employment, or before that during the interview process,” Heiligenstein said. “He obviously thought it had been worked out.”

Nielson told Heiligenstein in mid-December about the bar complaint and that he was resigning, Heiligenstein said. Nielson’s picture and his position with the agency were still posted on the agency’s Web site Monday afternoon. Agency spokesman Steve Pustelnyk , alerted to this, had the post removed later in the day.

Nielson, who graduated from the University of Texas School of Law in 1986, according to the bar, served on the Round Rock City Council from 1999 to 2005. He became general counsel for the mobility authority several months later, in effect replacing private attorney Brian Cassidy, who had been doing legal work for the agency on a contract basis almost since its creation in 2002.

Cassidy, who had continued to provide some services for the authority, including lobbying at the Capitol, was back in the counsel’s chair when the mobility authority board of directors met Jan. 27.

The bar decision said that Nielson, representing a landowner, in late 2000 had approached another person, identified in the original grievance as Wilson. Nielson and Wilson, anticipating a $100,000 profit on what Nielson described Monday as a “land flip,” agreed that Wilson would put up $25,000 “earnest money.” Two years later, according to the judgment, the partner questioned Nielson about when they would see the profits. Only at that point, the document says, did Nielson reveal that the deal had soured and returned the $25,000.

It was unclear Monday whether that $25,000 was a part of the $50,000 settlement of the lawsuit.

Heiligenstein is interviewing candidates for general counsel, he said Monday.

Shami in debate: "Forget about toll roads"

Posted on by

Link to article here.

White, Shami spar on death penalty, gas tax in Texas Democratic governor debate

11:37 PM CST on Monday, February 8, 2010

By ROBERT T. GARRETT / The Dallas Morning News
rtgarrett@dallasnews.com FORT WORTH – The two main Democratic candidates for governor clashed on the death penalty, increasing the gasoline tax and halting Barnett Shale energy production Monday night in their only statewide televised debate.

Former Houston Mayor Bill White, who covets a November showdown with GOP incumbent Rick Perry, staked out more conservative positions on taxes, crime and the environment than his opponent, Houston businessman Farouk Shami.

Shami, a political newcomer, concentrated on surviving the March 2 primary. Sounding populist themes, he wooed key Democratic constituencies and cast himself as the change agent in the race.

“They want somebody with a clean record,” Shami said of disgruntled voters.

The hourlong debate was calm, with few direct exchanges and plenty of agreement between the two candidates. But it laid bare a number of disagreements between the two that hadn’t been seen before in a campaign that has seen most of the energy on the GOP side.

White opposed placing a moratorium on executions and on natural-gas drilling in urban North Texas’ shale belt, while Shami said justice and public health require both.

Shami said he supports capital punishment, “if we are 110 percent certain” of guilt. But he said recent exonerations, many based on DNA testing, require a pause so that cases can be reviewed.

“We have killed lots of innocent people in the state of Texas,” Shami said – a claim that hasn’t been definitively proven.

White, though, said a moratorium on executions would be too broad. “That would disrespect the juries and the victims,” he said.

White acknowledged the system has problems, but said it generally works pretty well. He said he rejects “one-size-fits-all” solutions in this and other parts of government.

White also managed to get in a dig at Perry on the question, criticizing the governor for reshuffling a state forensic science panel that was scheduled to hear experts on flawed arson science used to convict and execute Cameron Todd Willingham for the fire that killed his three daughters.

White is considered the front-runner in the race, and many Democrats hope he can avoid a runoff and prepare for a battle against Perry or perhaps U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison while the two go to a protracted runoff. But Shami is spending millions of his own dollars on the race, and with five little-known candidates on the Democratic ballot and low turnout expected, it’s unclear whether White can top 50 percent to avoid an extra round of his own.

Barnett Shale

On the Barnett Shale, which has sparked concern in recent weeks over emissions of benzene, a cancer-causing gas, Shami called for a halt to production.

“Human life is more precious than digging for gas or oil,” he said afterward.

Shami, criticizing air quality in Houston during White’s tenure as mayor, brought up the Barnett Shale, using the one question he was allowed to ask White.

It effectively highlighted how White won’t join him in endorsing a moratorium on the gas drilling, though it’s unclear how widespread voter concern over the issue is statewide.

White stood his ground, saying it would be “unfair to shut down operations of all operators based on what some operators do.”

On transportation, White said he would be reluctant to raise the state’s 20-cent-a-gallon gasoline tax, while Shami endorsed an 8-cent increase.

“Yes, I believe in raising the gas a little bit,” Shami said, promising one big benefit to commuters: “Forget about toll roads.”

White said he first wants to quit siphoning off gasoline tax money for nonhighway programs.

He criticized Perry’s appointees to the Texas Transportation Commission for wanting to issue more bonds, eating into road maintenance money.

Economic issues

Shami, who has courted Hispanic voters, criticized existing border policies as inhumane.

“Without Mexicans, you know, it’d be like a day without sunshine in our state,” Shami said.

He promised to create 100,000 new jobs within two years as governor, or he’d personally donate $10 million of his money to the state.

“As a governor, everybody will have a job,” Shami said. Training fire on White, he added: “We lost 43,000 jobs in Houston since he took over.”

White, though, suggested that Shami had overpromised.

“I do not think the governor of Texas has control over the global economy,” White said. “I do think that the governor of Texas can do what we can to prepare our workforce to take advantage of the future.”

Several people in the 40-person studio audience joined a panel of journalists in asking the candidates questions, including Elgie Clayton of Emory, who asked about Texas’ deregulation of electricity in many sections of the state.

That allowed Shami to discuss his vision of eliminating electric bills, by having homeowners install solar panels and sell their unused power to the electricity grid.

White stressed weatherization programs he championed in Houston, and decades of experience in energy that include a high federal post and running businesses.

The debate was sponsored by the same coalition of groups that organized the first of the GOP debates: KERA, in partnership with KTVT-TV (Channel 11) and KTXA-TV (Channel 21), the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, KUVN-TV (Channel 23), the Texas Association of Broadcasters, Texas State Networks and the Freedom of Information Foundation of Texas.

__________________________________________________________

Link to article here.

White, Shami try to win votes in only scheduled debate
By Corrie MacLaggan and Jason Embry
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF

Published: 11:17 p.m. Monday, Feb. 8, 2010

Democratic gubernatorial candidate Bill White largely bypassed opponent Farouk Shami in a televised debate Monday night, instead attacking Gov. Rick Perry and seeking to appeal beyond his party to independents and Republicans.

Shami, meanwhile, criticized White and distanced himself from “career politicians” while making some big promises to Texans: If he’s elected, they won’t have an electric bill in 10 years, and if he doesn’t succeed in creating 100,000 jobs in two years, he’ll give the state $10 million.

“I will be the one to make the American dream a reality to all our citizens,” said Shami, 67, who was born in what was then Palestine and arrived in the United States in 1965. Shami pointed to his participation in the debate as “proof that the American dream is still alive” and likened his candidacy to that of President Barack Obama — whom he referred to as “President Barack Hussein Obama.”

“The state is ready for a brown governor called Farouk Shami,” he said.

The event was the first — and only scheduled — Democratic gubernatorial debate, giving many Texas viewers their first good look at White, a former Houston mayor, and Shami, founder of a Houston-based hair care products company. Though White was a popular mayor, he is not widely known outside of that city, and Shami has never before run for political office. Shami, who is spending millions of his own money on his campaign, has been advertising on TV for months; White recently started airing his TV ads.

White, 55, is the clear choice of Texas’ Democratic establishment, and he seemed to succeed in avoiding major blunders to derail his front-runner status. The former U.S. deputy secretary of energy and former chairman of the Texas Democratic Party said he wants to ensure that legislative sessions “are not hijacked by wedge issues” and said Perry “has brought the partisan politics of Washington to the statehouse.”

White sought to paint himself as a pragmatist who would put consensus over ideology, and in that process he made an appeal to the political center. He said there should never be injustice in the criminal justice system, but he said he supports the death penalty. He did not name any abortion restrictions that he would overturn. He did not embrace a higher gas tax, and he broadly said education and job training would be his top priorities.

At the same time, he did what he needed to do to keep Democratic voters happy, saying he opposes school vouchers and legislation requiring voters to present more identification at the polls.

He stressed that he had sought consensus as mayor of Houston, which appeared to be his way of telling Republican voters that GOP lawmakers would have plenty of seats at the table in his administration.

“I don’t think leadership means getting diverted into the so-called hot button issues that divide Texans,” White said.

Shami attacked White’s work as mayor and characterized himself as better prepared to create jobs.

“You talk about it — I do something about it,” Shami said to White. Shami also said, “People want a change — a major change.”

Shami cited job creation as the solution to a number of the state’s problems, but he did little to spell out how government could create those jobs. Shami also avoided giving direct answers to some questions, including on whether he would mandate the E-Verify system to check whether employees are eligible to work in the United States.

White said that the system is useful but that he wouldn’t create mandates on private employers.

Shami was specific on other issues, saying he supports a moratorium on the death penalty, opposes school vouchers and thinks abortion should be legal for the first two to three months of a woman’s pregnancy.

White gently pointed out some “good faith” differences between himself and Shami, saying that when it comes to finding money to pay for new roads, he wouldn’t start with raising the gas tax, though Shami has said he would raise the tax.

Shami got a question about gay marriage and said he “would not take freedom from any individual.” But though most questions were asked of both candidates, White got a pass on that one.

Both White and Shami called education a priority, with Shami saying he wants to increase teacher salaries and White saying that Texas children deserve a good education “regardless of whether there’s a refinery next door or a mansion” or a modest house.

The debate was held at the CBS 11/TXA 21 studios with a studio audience of about 40 people, some of whom asked questions of the candidates. Other candidates in the Democratic gubernatorial primary — Alma Aguado, Felix Alvarado, William Dear, Clement Glenn and Star Locke — were not invited because they did not meet debate organizers’ criteria.

The winner of the primary will face the winner of the Republican primary — involving Gov. Rick Perry, businesswoman Debra Medina and U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison — in November.

At the end of the event, White asked the audience to compare Monday’s debate — which he characterized as civil — with the two previous GOP debates, which he characterized as people shouting over each other.

More pork with gas taxes, this time for "Office of livable communities"

Posted on by

Link to article here. This publication is geared for truckers, but it reveals $500 million in further diversions of our gas taxes that have nothing to do with transportation.

Highway tax dollars for ‘livable communities’
Landline Magazine
February 2, 2010

What exactly are “livable communities,” and how much do they cost? If you’re a highway user, you could begin paying soon for livable communities even if it’s not clear where the money would go.

The Obama administration is proposing to create a new Office of Livable Communities and fund it with $500 million from the U.S. Department of Transportation.

The administration included the concept as part of a $3.8 trillion federal budget request issued Monday, Feb. 1. The budget request includes $78.8 billion for the U.S. Department of Transportation of which $500 million would be used to fund and staff the new office.

Truckers who operate just 4 percent of the registered vehicles on the roadways – but who pay a 36 percent share of the bill for highways and transportation through taxes and fees – deserve to know where the money for “livable communities” will go, OOIDA leadership says.

“We certainly have some concern with it because we believe there could be a serious diversion of highway user dollars to these so-called livable communities and this Office of Livable Communities,” OOIDA Director of Legislative Affairs Mike Joyce told Land Line Now on Sirius XM.

“We’re not sure what the benefits truly will be for America’s highway users and America’s truckers.”

Without a clear intention for the money, the government is leaving no choice but for the highway user to be skeptical, Joyce says.

“I don’t think anybody at DOT or from the Congress has clearly defined what livable communities are,” Joyce said.

“The fear is that there is no definition, that there are no true parameters to what livable communities are and how money can be spent on livable communities. … And so it ends up at the discretion of the secretary of transportation and the folks that are running that office as to how they want to spend that money. That’s a very serious concern.”

BREAKING: TxDOT admits Trans Texas Corridor ALIVE, despite claim it's DEAD

Posted on by

On February 1, 2010, in a Joint Senate and House Transportation Committee hearing, Senator John Carona directly asked TxDOT Executive Director Amadeo Saenz if TxDOT decided tomorrow that it wants to build the Trans Texas Corridor after all, does it still have the statutory authority to do so? Saenz answered: “Yes.”

See for yourself below…

Perry & TxDOT continue to lie about tolling existing freeways

Posted on by

IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Perry’s debate fib about state law prohibiting tolling existing freeways repeated in news report

(Wednesday, February 3, 2010) Confusion persists about whether or not it is legal to convert free highway lanes into toll lanes in the state of Texas, despite Governor Rick Perry’s claim that it is illegal during the January 29 Republican gubernatorial debate. In an article in the Dallas Morning News February 1, TxDOT spokesman Chris Lippincott stated:

“’The department has made it clear that we have no interest in tolling existing lanes,’ Texas Department of Transportation spokesman Chris Lippincott said this afternoon, when told of the Obama budget provision. ‘Whether we are prohibited from doing so in federal law is irrelevant,’ he said.

The article goes on to say…
“And it wouldn’t be easy, even if the state’s Transportation Commission didn’t have a policy in place that effectively abides by the moratorium. To turn a freeway (or even a single lane of existing roadway) into a toll road, TEXDOT would need a waiver from the Federal Highway Administration. These are granted only rarely. Then, state law requires approval from the county commissioners and then from a county’s voters.”

Terri Hall, Founder of Texas TURF counters, “Not only is TxDOT planning to toll existing lanes, they’re lying about it. The feds are not only aware of the plans for US 281 in San Antonio in particular, it had already granted clearance until we sued to stop them. So rare or not, the feds granted it.”

Perry’s greatest fib of the January 29 debate was his insistence that the Texas legislature passed a bill in 2005 prohibiting the conversion of free lanes to toll lanes. However, the bill, HB 2702, tells precisely how TxDOT can LEGALLY convert existing highway lanes into toll lanes through 6 exceptions, one that allows a conversion of free lanes by simply downgrading the free lanes to access roads adjacent to the tollway.

Though the language doesn’t specifically use the term “access roads” to refer to the relocating of free lanes adjacent to the tollway, TxDOT has consistently interpreted the law to mean it has the authority to downgrade freeway lanes to access roads without triggering a public vote based on HB 2702. See the two-part discussion of this law before the Sunset Commission in 2008 here and here. Part-two shows TxDOT Executive Director Amadeo Saenz stating TxDOT’s interpretation of HB 2702 allows highway lanes to be downgraded to access roads.

The bill also contains a gaping grandfather clause that exempts virtually all the toll projects currently on the table (because they were designated as toll roads in MPO plans prior to September of 2005), so no public vote would be triggered for the dozens of grandfathered toll projects.

“Perry’s elitist ‘you can eat cake’ attitude is this: if you can’t afford the toll lanes, you can sit in congestion on the stop-light ridden access roads. He thinks replacing free highway lanes with access roads is acceptable and his highway department is doing it all over Texas,” says Hall.

The citizens’ fight to stop the conversion of existing FREEway lanes into toll lanes on US 281 and Loop 1604 in San Antonio, 290 West in Austin, and Hwy 59 in East Texas (part of Trans Texas Corridor TTC-69 that’s still alive and well) has languished precisely because of the loopholes in HB 2702.

TURF worked 24/7 in the last session to fix these loopholes. Rep. David Leibowitz of San Antonio introduced a bill to do so and got it attached to the TxDOT sunset bill (but it was stripped in the Senate).

“Texans deserve protection from the DOUBLE TAXATION of converting freeways into tollways. Perry was dead wrong to imply Texans are protected in state law. They’re not, especially for the exempted Trans Texas Corridors, like TTC-69, that will ‘upgrade’ existing freeways (like Hwy 59) into tollways at the hands of foreign companies,” Hall emphasized.

See detailed proof of the freeway to tollway conversion plans for US 281 on this web site: http://www.281overpassesnow.com.

Portion of HB 2702 that addresses converting existing highways into toll roads –

SECTION 2.36. Chapter 228, Transportation Code, is amended
by adding Subchapter E to read as follows: SUBCHAPTER E. LIMITATION ON TOLL FACILITY DETERMINATION; CONVERSION OF NONTOLLED STATE HIGHWAY Sec. 228.201. LIMITATION ON TOLL FACILITY DESIGNATION.
Except as provided by Section 228.2015, the department may not operate a nontolled state highway or a segment of a nontolled state highway as a toll project, and may not transfer a highway or segment to another entity for operation as a toll project, unless: (1) the commission by order designated the highway or segment as a toll project before the contract to construct the highway or segment was awarded; (2) the highway or segment was open to traffic as a turnpike project on or before September 1, 2005; (3) the project was designated as a toll project in a plan or program of a metropolitan planning organization on or before September 1, 2005; (4) the highway or segment is reconstructed so that the number of nontolled lanes on the highway or segment is greater than or equal to the number in existence before the reconstruction; (5) a facility is constructed adjacent to the highway or segment so that the number of nontolled lanes on the converted highway or segment and the adjacent facility together is greater than or equal to the number in existence on the converted highway or segment before the conversion; or (6) the commission converts the highway or segment to a toll facility by: (A) making the determination required by Section 228.202; (B) conducting the hearing required by Section 228.203; and (C) obtaining county and voter approval as required by Sections 228.207 and 228.208.

Sec. 228.2015. LIMITATION TRANSITION. (a) Notwithstanding
Section 228.201, the department may operate a nontolled state
highway or a segment of a nontolled state highway as a toll project
if: (1) a construction contract was awarded for the highway or segment before September 1, 2005; (2) the highway or segment had not at any time before September 1, 2005, been open to traffic; and (3) the commission designated the highway or segment as a toll project before the earlier of: (A) the date the highway or segment is opened to traffic; or (B) September 1, 2005. (b) This section expires September 1, 2006.

SECTION 2.37. Section 362.0041, Transportation Code, is
transferred to Subchapter E, Chapter 228, Transportation Code,
redesignated as Sections 228.202-228.208, and amended to read as
follows:
Sec. 228.202 [362.0041 ]. COMMISSION DETERMINATION [CONVERSION OF PROJECTS ]. The [(a) Except as provided in Subsections (d) and (g), the ] commission may by order convert a nontolled state highway or a segment of a nontolled state highway [the free state highway system ] to a toll project [facility ] if it determines that the conversion will improve overall mobility in the region or is the most feasible and economic means to accomplish necessary expansion, improvements, or extensions to that segment of the state highway system.

Sec. 228.203. PUBLIC HEARING. [(b) ] Prior to converting a state highway or a segment of a[the ] state highway [ system ] under
this subchapter [section ], the commission shall conduct a public
hearing for the purpose of receiving comments from interested
persons concerning the proposed conversion [transfer ]. Notice of
the hearing shall be published in the Texas Register, one or more
newspapers of general circulation, and a newspaper, if any,
published in the county or counties in which the involved highway is
located. Sec. 228.204. RULES. [(c) ] The commission shall adopt
rules implementing this subchapter [section ], including criteria and guidelines for the approval of a conversion of a highway. Sec. 228.205. QUEEN ISABELLA CAUSEWAY. [(d) ] The commission may not convert the Queen Isabella Causeway in Cameron
County to a toll project [facility ].

Sec. 228.206. TOLL REVENUE. [(e) Subchapter G, Chapter
361, applies to a highway converted to a toll facility under this
section. [(f) ] Toll revenue collected under this section:
(1) shall be deposited in the state highway fund;
(2) may be used by the department to finance the
improvement, extension, expansion, or operation of the converted
segment of highway and may not be collected except for those
purposes; and (3) is exempt from the application of Section 403.095,
Government Code.

Sec. 228.207. COUNTY AND VOTER APPROVAL. [(g) ] The
commission may only convert a state highway or a segment of a[the ]
state highway [ system ] under this subchapter [section ] if the
conversion is approved by : (1) the commissioners court of each county within
which the highway or segment is located ; and (2) the qualified voters who vote in an election under Section 228.208 and who reside in the limits of: (A) a county if any part of the highway or segment to be converted is located in an unincorporated area of the county; or (B) a municipality in which the highway or segment to be converted is wholly located .

Sec. 228.208. ELECTION TO APPROVE CONVERSION. (a) If
notified by the department of the proposed conversion of a highway
or segment under this subchapter, and after approval of the
conversion by the appropriate commissioners courts as required by
Section 228.207(1), the commissioners court of each county
described by Section 228.207(2)(A) or the governing body of a
municipality described by Section 228.207(2)(B), as applicable,
shall call an election for the approval or disapproval of the
conversion. (b) If a county or municipality orders an election, the
county or municipality shall publish notice of the election in a
newspaper of general circulation published in the county or
municipality at least once each week for three consecutive weeks,
with the first publication occurring at least 21 days before the
date of the election. (c) An order or resolution ordering an election and the
election notice required by Subsection (b) must show, in addition
to the requirements of the Election Code, the location of each
polling place and the hours that the polls will be open. (d) The proposition submitted in the election must distinctly state the highway or segment proposed to be converted
and the limits of that highway or segment. (e) At an election ordered under this section, the ballots shall be printed to permit voting for or against the proposition:
“The conversion of (highway) from (beginning location) to (ending
location) to a toll project.” (f) A proposed conversion is approved only if it is approved
by a majority of the votes cast. (g) A notice of the election and a certified copy of the
order canvassing the election results shall be sent to the
commission.

-30-

CEO of road contractor, PBS&J, steps down in pay to play scandal

Posted on by

Link to article here.

PBS&J gets lots of contracts in Texas despite the perpetual scandals revealed about the company. Between embezzlement, overbilling, the company paying employees back for political contributions, and now it’s pay to play bribes, PBS&J is clearly a criminal outfit beyond redemption. The San Antonio MPO awarded them a contract even after we alerted them to the first round of corruption with this company. Now we find out the corruption has been at the top all along. Where’s the outrage in Texas? Why don’t they ban all contracts going to this criminal company? Why can’t these guys make an honest living? No wonder the public remains skeptical when it comes transportation contracting…

Tue, Feb. 02, 2010
CEO of PBS&J to step down amid scandal
BY DAN CHRISTENSEN
BrowardBulldog.org
Miami Herald

The boss of one of Florida’s biggest government contractors has announced he’s stepping down. The news comes weeks after embarrassing disclosures about his personal involvement in a corporate pay to play scandal, and disclosures about possible corrupt payoffs overseas by company officials.“After a decade of my executive leadership through the best of times and through difficult times it is now time to plan an orderly transition to a new CEO,” PBS&J chief executive John Zumwalt, 58, said in a prepared statement last week. Zumwalt will continue as chairman of PBS&J’s board of directors.

A company source told Broward Bulldog that Zumwalt was forced out by a group of unhappy employee-shareholders. PBS&J spokeswoman Kathe Riley Jackson deniedit.

PBS&J is a major competitor for government contracts in Broward, where over the years it has made tens of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions to Republicans and Democrats.

At the same time, PBS&J has received public sector business worth tens of millions of dollars. The company currently leads the design engineering team for the county’s $810 million airport runway expansion project. At the Broward School Board, PBS&J has helped manage school construction projects.

Until last summer, Zumwalt was also president of PBS&J International — the subsidiary that’s the focus of an internal investigation into possible violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

The act prohibits corrupt payments to foreign officials to obtain or keep business. Zumwalt was replaced as president by Walid Hatoum.

“Initial results of the investigation suggest that FCPA violations may have occurred. However, the investigation does not suggest that any violation extends beyond the international operations or that members of our executive management were involved in the illegal conduct,” the company said in its annual report filed with the SEC on Jan. 13.

PBS&J, which shifted its headquarters from South Florida to Tampa in 2007, has provided no details about what spurred the internal probe, nor has it named the country or countries where payoffs are suspected.

Dan Christensen, a former Miami Herald reporter and columnist for The Daily Business Review, is founding editor of BrowardBulldog.org, a nonprofit online-only newspaper.

Lawmakers trot out special interests to lobby for tax hikes

Posted on by

Public hearing turned lobbyist feeding frenzy
By Terri Hall
San Antonio Express-News/Houston Examiner
Feb 02, 2010

We’ve seen it before. But in an election year during an economic downturn, it’s breathtaking — a room stacked with lobbyists and elected officials lobbying for higher taxes. Yesterday’s Joint Public Hearing of both the House and Senate Transportation Committees (more news coverage below) to discuss the state of transportation finance was what San Antonio Rep. Ruth McClendon defined as insanity, doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. McClendon feels that unless the political aspect of why road funding has not been properly addressed, all the public hearings and testimony won’t change the outcome.

Ultimately, Governor Rick Perry has repeatedly threatened a veto of any increase in transportation funding other than his policy of privatized toll roads, and he’s managed to successfully starve or squander existing funding enough to accomplish his goal. Perry, David Dewhurst, Tom Craddick and Steve Ogden’s desire to raid teacher retirement and public employee pension funds to finance these risky toll road deals fell flat in the Legislature, a sentiment echoed in yesterday’s hearing.

Once again, lawmakers tried to make the case that TxDOT is plum out of money and that higher taxes are needed to build more roads, while conservative legislator Rep. Linda Harper-Brown and a handful of conservative watchdog groups pushed back saying there’s already tax collected that’s not getting to transportation, which needs to be fixed first.

Business interests like the Texas Association of Business and virtually all the urban Chamber of Commerce groups shamelessly advocated private toll roads, and every tax imaginable to go to roads. San Antonio Greater Chamber of Commerce President Richard Perez even asked for a “arterial collection” tax, which is code for tolling surface streets, not just highways. These hogs at the trough want no tax left “un-levied” to exploit the powers of government taxation and forcibly empty our pockets to fill theirs. They want it all — from a hike in vehicle registration fees and vehicle sales tax to property tax, sales tax, and basically taxes on anything that moves.

Lawmakers again had a hard time discerning the true funding “needs” due to TxDOT persistently including projects not on the state highway system in its “funding gap” figures that started at $86 billion in 2006 (then was revised downward by $30 BILLION after the State Auditor found TxDOT had bloated that figure) and is now up to $387 billion. TURF also obtained sworn testimony from a former employee of the State Auditor that Perry’s Transportation Commission directed the agency to gin-up its 2006 funding gap so that it appeared insurmountable under the gas tax system (so it could push private toll roads as the solution to funding shortfalls). Distrust of TxDOT is the elephant in the room few lawmakers seemed prepared to address.

Americans for Prosperity and Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom, two of only three watchdog groups to testify (Eagle Forum didn’t show and Texas Public Policy Foundation was invited but declined) compared with 31 invited witnesses in favor of higher taxes without accountability, emphasized prioritizing existing funding first, like ending diversions of gas taxes revenues away from transportation, and cleaning up a broken TxDOT that continues to illegally use taxpayers money on lobbying for more privatized toll roads.

Defending the indefensible
Though the Texas Conservative Coalition echoed many of the same sentiments, its Director, John Colyandro, was taken to task by Chairman Senator John Carona for advocating the most expensive road tax while rejecting a more affordable gas tax increase. “How is that conservative?” asked Carona.

While Colyandro stopped short of endorsing Rick Perry’s position of having all new capacity being toll lanes handed over to foreign corporations that charge 75 cents PER MILE to use public roads, he did advocate that private toll roads have a legitimate role as part of a mix of both toll and non-toll roads.

Earlier in the hearing, Carona laid down the gauntlet asking, “I’m looking for someone to come and defend to me that a privately built toll road is less expensive than a free road ’cause it just ain’t so.” While Colyandro and many of the lobbyists and local politicians asked for the moratorium on private toll roads be lifted and remain “one of the tools in the tool box,” none could defend how that funding “option” was more affordable than a gas tax increase. Because it isn’t. It’s rather telling when even a so-called anti-tax advocate lobbies for the most expensive road funding option, but outright rejects the most affordable one.

TxDOT admits Trans Texas Corridor still alive & well
Considering all the campaign rhetoric from Perry claiming the Trans Texas Corridor (TTC) is “dead,” his highway department laid it to rest when it admitted on the record that it’s still alive and well in the transportation code. The Department still has the legal authority to move forward with it should Perry be re-elected. So once again, all the claims that the TTC is dead, are just plain inaccurate. In fact, one of Perry’s appointees to the Transportation Commission, Ned Holmes, asked at a Commission hearing last fall that the TTC-69 private toll contract be expedited. Two other pending TTC corridors, La Entrada de Pacifico and Ports to Plains are also actively being pursued.

Private toll roads cost more than public
As part of the discussion on private versus public toll roads, several lawmakers queried TxDOT staff and Commission Chairwoman as to why public agencies can’t go to the bond market and fund these toll roads the same as a private operator can and even more cheaply since they can access tax-exempt bonds and don’t need to make a profit. The answer is it can stay in the public’s hands more affordably.

Though Transportation Commission Chairwoman Deirdre Delisi tried to say the private operators can tap money the taxpayers can’t, it’s totally false. In fact, it’s the other way around. The private sector is exploiting the tax-exempt capital backed by taxpayers (like federally backed TIFIA loans and Private Activity Bonds, PABs, as well as other sources of taxpayer revenue like gas taxes to subsidize toll projects) in addition to its access to the private bond market, which charges higher interest rates resulting in higher toll rates.

If a potential road is toll viable, the public toll entity can go to Wall Street and get private investors to fund the project using toll revenue bonds based on traffic forecasts. The private investors, not the taxpayer, are on the hook if the traffic fails to show-up to cover the debt. No public money has to be tapped when building a toll viable road.

Delisi seemed clueless as to what a toll viable road even was or how one is funded, looking to TxDOT staff to bailout her out of answering the question. That’s because TxDOT hasn’t built any toll viable roads since she became Chair. Delisi also claimed there were no guarantees (where the taxpayers bailout the private entities) that the private operators would make a profit, yet an article in today’s Bond Buyer confirms there are.

Financial death spiral
Under Perry, rather than scrap toll projects that won’t pay for themselves, he’s buried the taxpayers in massive amounts of new debt to SUBSIDIZE losing toll projects, socializing the losses and privatizing the profits. Pre-Perry, there was ZERO debt for roads. On Perry’s watch, $12 billion in debt has been amassed, not counting the off-budget debt local toll entities have had to incur to pick-up the slack for the State’s failure to properly fund STATE highways (and millions the Governor’s office has spent on roads for Colonias).

Much of this money has been leveraged multiple times (using borrowed money as collateral to borrow more money, and often several times over), the same reckless financial methods that got us into the mortgage crisis and bailout era. If we continue down this road, debt service payments will likely eat-up our existing gas taxes at a faster pace than inflation, fuel efficiency, and diversions COMBINED!

Though there’s some room to borrow more money for roads, the Texas Bond Review Board Executive Director warned, there’s not much available. Many of the State’s bond ratings have already dropped from AAA to AA+. Perry has basically maxed out the State’s credit card in just 5 years!

Carona closed the hearing saying the committees planned to reach out to taxpayer groups next time around to try and reach consensus so that road funding issues get solved and not stonewalled for another session. From our perspective, more funding is a non-starter until they end gas tax diversions and audit and clean house at TxDOT, holding them accountable for the years of wrongdoing.

Be sure to read TURF’s oral testimony and written testimony.___________________________________________________________

Link to article here.

North Texans revive push for local-option transportation funding bill

Posted Monday, Feb. 01, 2010

By DAVE MONTGOMERY
Star-Telegram
AUSTIN — Undaunted by failure in the last two legislative sessions, North Texas leaders are organizing another push behind a local-option transportation bill that would authorize local elections to finance millions of dollars in road and rail projects.

Officials from Fort Worth, Dallas and Arlington signaled their intentions at a joint hearing before the state House and Senate transportation committees Monday, saying that congestion and pollution have only worsened since a similar bill died in the closing days of the 2009 Legislature.

“We in North Texas are facing nothing less than a mobility crisis,” said Fort Worth Mayor Mike Moncrief. “North Texas needs your help. The people of Fort Worth need your help.”

The legislative initiative being prepared for the 2011 Legislature would allow county or regional elections in which voters would choose from a menu of funding options, such as an increase in gasoline taxes or auto registration fees, Fort Worth Councilman Jungus Jordan said in outlining the plan after the hearing.

Jordan said proponents are tailoring the local-option feature for use in any region and plan to mount a statewide push on behalf of the bill.

In another key difference from the previous campaign, Jordan said, proponent cities will rely on help from business groups instead of tax-financed city funds to pay for lobbying efforts for the bill.

The measure is similar in concept to the 2009 bill, which Gov. Rick Perry and vocal conservative groups denounced as a tax increase. But Jordan said supporters will stress that urban residents are already paying millions of dollars in “hidden taxes,” such as lost productivity and increased business costs, because of traffic congestion.

Arlington Mayor Robert Cluck, a physician, told lawmakers that proponents will also cite the public-health benefits of reducing traffic. He pointed out that pollution in the Metroplex carries the same consequences as smoking and exacerbates pulmonary illnesses.

“As we get more and more cars off the street, the amount of asthma that we see will go down dramatically,” he said.

More than two dozen suburban communities joined with Dallas, Fort Worth and Arlington in the unsuccessful effort to pass the 2009 measure, called the Texas Local Option Transportation Act. The larger municipalities also hired one of Austin’s premier lobbying firms, HillCo Partners, to help push the bill.

“We didn’t stop after the last session,” Jordan said.

Planners are still working out details but hope to have a draft within 30 to 60 days. North Texas leaders will also hold discussions with their counterparts in San Antonio, Houston, Austin, Lubbock, Corpus Christi, El Paso and smaller urban areas to form a statewide coalition, Jordan said.

Metroplex leaders, he said, still have the same priorities as in 2009: finding money for up to 250 miles of commuter rail and expansion of the now overburdened road and highway network.

“The unparalleled quality of life that we’ve built is severely threatened by our congested highways and roadways,” Moncrief told the lawmakers, saying that “many if not most” of North Texas residents are “fed up” with being stuck in traffic.

“They deserve answers,” he said. “Not next month. Not next year. Now.”

The daylong hearing by the House Transportation Committee and the Senate Committee on Transportation and Homeland Security was called to explore funding options to help the state avert a looming transportation crisis.

Some lawmakers are touting an increase in the gasoline tax, which hasn’t been changed since 1991.

Deirdre Delisi, chairwoman of the Texas Transportation Commission, declined to take a position on the proposal but said the state needs financial stability to address “serious transportation challenges” over the next two decades.

The state will run out of money for new transportation projects by 2012. A panel of Texas business and civic leaders appointed by the commission says the state needs to invest at least $315 billion through 2030 to maintain roadways, combat urban traffic congestion, and increase mobility and safety.

_________________________________________________________________

Link to article here.

Money for roads sought

State could look at fuel tax hike

Posted: 02/02/2010 12:00:00 AM MST

EL PASO — State legislators on Monday began what will be a long and difficult process to create new revenue streams for highway construction in Texas.

Money to relieve the congested freeways in the state has dried up and lawmakers have been left with the task of coming up with billions of dollars to relieve traffic tie-ups.

The members of the Texas House and Senate transportation committee had a joint meeting in Austin to discuss how the state will come up with additional revenue to help build new roads starting in 2012.

Both committees heard from mayors — including El Paso Mayor John Cook — transportation officials, lobbyists and business leaders during a meeting that began at 7 a.m. El Paso time and lasted until well past 4 p.m.

Although no official plan was discussed, most of the conversation revolved around a proposed hike in the state’s fuel tax, which has been stagnant at 20 cents per gallon since 1991.

“Yes, that’s on everyone’s mind, but the reality is that it won’t be easy to sell a gas tax increase to the public,” said state Rep. Joe Pickett, D-El Paso, the chairman of the House’s transportation committee. “Just think about the sound bite on television. As soon as you hear increase, your mind is going to be turned off by it.”

Pickett’s committee, along with its counterpart in the Senate, began pitching a hike — or at least a retooling — of the fuel tax since last fall.

According to figures from the Texas Department of Transportation, the state could be $250 billion behind in highway construction by 2050, when the population of the state will reach 50 million.

“By January 2012, TxDOT will be dead-flat broke and without new revenues to build new roads. That’s a big issue,” said state Sen. Eliot Shapleigh, D-El Paso, a member of the Senate’s transportation committee.

Shapleigh said the state should not only increase the fuel tax but also alter it to make sure fuel-efficient vehicles pay their fair share in taxes for new highways.

Gov. Rick Perry, though, has said he will veto any bill that asks for an increase in fuel tax.

“Both Perry and (Lt. Gov. David) Dewhurst have seceded from reality and they’re doing nothing to fix the problem,” Shapleigh said.

Members of both committees conceded Monday that fixing TxDOT’s budget shortfall would require innovative legislation and changes to long-standing fee structures.

Some of the proposed changes include increasing vehicle registration fees, pushing cities and counties to use the Transportation Increment Refinancing Zone funding mechanism, and forcing TxDOT to become more efficient.

Officials also discussed creating a local option that would allow municipalities and counties to create local fuel taxes to help build local roads.

Legislators said the state needs to be more in tune with the U.S. Department of Transportation to secure as much federal funding as possible.

“Whatever happens, I hope all these tools that have been discussed are kept on the toolshed for us to use,” said Cook. “El Paso has taken advantage of many of these tools and we are doing well because of it.”

Many El Paso commuters, though, said they wouldn’t like to see an increase in fuel taxes, especially because gas prices have skyrocketed in the last five years.

“Look at me. I’m almost paying $3 a gallon here. And now they want me to pay more? That’s awful,” said Susan Robert, who was fueling her car at a Central convenience store on Monday. “I think we have enough roads for right now. Don’t raise my taxes.”

Pickett said he is concerned that the recent boom in highway construction — about $1 billion worth has been approved — in El Paso could make people think TxDOT is in good shape and that a fuel tax increase is not needed.

“El Paso is in good shape for the next four or five years, and I say that with hesitation because I know that we have done things right here and things have played in our favor,” he said. “But we are talking about the future and our list of projects is long.”

Pickett added, “Finding a solution to the transportation funding problem is going to be one of the most difficult things to get through the Legislature in the next session … but I guess I already knew that.”

__________________________________________________________________

Web Posted: 02/01/2010 6:18 CST

Legislators debate road funding

By Josh Baugh – Express-News

AUSTIN — Texas lawmakers on Monday hammered home that without a new funding method, the Texas Department of Transportation will be unable to build any new roads beyond 2012 and will not have enough money to properly maintain existing roads within two to three years.

They also demonstrated that finding a new funding solution they can agree on won’t be easy.

Legislators on the Senate Committee on Transportation and Homeland Security and the House Committee on Transportation grappled with the use of “public-private partnerships” and comprehensive development agreements, or CDAs, that in some cases privatize toll roads.

Senate Chairman John Carona, R-Dallas, chastised language often associated with toll roads, that drivers can “choose” to use them. Carona said it’s “disingenuous” to say drivers will have an option if the only way to fund new-road construction is by tolling them.

“If every new road going forward is a toll road, that’s no choice,” he said.

Looking into other potential sources of dollars, Sen. Eliot Shapleigh, D-El Paso, asked Texas Transportation Commission Chairwoman Deirdre Delisi whether her board, appointed by Gov. Rick Perry to oversee TxDOT, supported an increase in the gas tax, something Perry has said he opposes. Delisi said it’s not the commission’s role to determine how much the gas tax should be increased, that’s the Legislature’s job.

Increasing the gas tax has been a political hot potato, but it’s an issue that’s gaining traction among lawmakers. It’s unclear, however, what chance it will stand during the 2011 legislative session.

Read the rest of the story here.