Author: Terri Hall

Toll rates hiked 80% to fund light rail

Posted on by

Link to article here.

Note from a friend who used to love in D.C.:

Dulles Airport is connected to Washington by a toll road. The toll road authority has promised to sell $2.5 billion of new toll bonds. The money will be given to the Airport Authority to build a $5 billion light rail line connecting the airport to the nearest DC Metro light rail line. Then the airport will give the rail line to DC Metro.

There are currently 4 free freeway lanes and 8 tollway lanes + frontage roads. But traffic has been flat on the road lanes since 2001. To repay the new toll bonds, the tollway lanes will have to have rate increases. The first round will be 80%. The rate increases will reduce traffic on the toll lanes. Those people will probably end up on the train.

This is gratuitous spending. People who would rather drive to the airport (and surrounding communities) are being purposefully priced out of their cars and forced onto a train. The roads are not congested. They will soon be underutilized. That will mean more rate increases.”

DC airports outfit to hike tolls 80% on Dulles Toll Road to fund metro rail line
Toll Road News
07-13-2009

Dulles Toll Road (DTR) toll rates will be nearly doubled by 2012 under a plan being considered by the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority (MWAA) who want to use tolls and toll revenue bonds to finance just over half the cost of a 5.26b metro-rail line. A “Plan of Finance” for the Dulles metrorail project by the airports authority’s Corridor Advisory Committee lays out two options, one of which doubles tolls at the mainline plaza from their present 75c to $1.50 by the end of this year and increases ramp tolls from 50c to 75c.

The second option would raise toll rates at the mainline plaza 25c in 2010, another 25c in 2011 and a third 25c in 2012. Most trips on the DTR involve a mainline toll and a ramp toll so the average trip on the 18km (12 mile) road would go $1.25 now to $2.25, or 80%. If the average trip is 15km (9mi) the toll rate would go from 8.3c/km (13.4c/mi) to 15c/km (24c/mi).

ADDITION: Meetings Wednesday morning (July 15 9am) will consider “Material Changes” to the revenue bonds and trust indenture, select a pricing advisor for bond sales, update the recommended plan of finance, hear new cost estimates, and consider amendments to toll rates. Mercator Advisors LLC are lead financial advisers to MWAA. (ADDED 2009-07-13 14:30)

Wilbur Smith Assoc (WSA) estimated for MWAA that Option 1 would increase toll revenues from $65m now to $101m in 2010 and $107m in 2012, whereas the Option 2 phase-in would increase toll revenues: 2010 $87.4m, 2011 $97.1m, 2012 $107.1m.

Option 1 garners an aggregate $377m over four years 2009-2012 compared to $357m with the Option 2 three year phase-in.

WSA’s new traffic and revenue study has not yet been released by the airports agency. [ADDITION: A spokesman said Monday that the WSA T&R report is only preliminary and not ready for public release. She said the final T&R study by WSA will be released as part of the bond prospectus. 2009-07-13 11:20)

A graph in the Finance Plan presentation showing changing forecasts suggests WSA reduced their estimates of revenue between a December 2006 and an August 2008 report. They appear to have gone from a 2011 to 2013 estimate of toll revenue of around $125m 2006-12 to about $97m 2008-08. The graph shows they now (2009-05) project revenue in those years at the $107m in 2012.

That’s a 65% increase in revenue from an 80% increase in toll rates, suggesting a decline in traffic from present levels of about 9%.

2020 projections keep getting better

For 2020 the three WSA projections show toll revenue on the DTR for 2020 as $180m (2006-12), $195m (2008-08) and $220m (2009-05). We can only read off the graph since MWAA hasn’t released the reports with their tables.

You have to wonder why WSA’s reported forecasts of DTR toll revenue for 2020 would get progressively more optimistic between December 2006 and May 2009, swelling in two iterations by about 15%. (Do they now assume a two-term Reaganite president ushering in a new era of economic growth from 2012 on?)

Need $220m tolls/year by 2020

Anyway, the DTR “Plan of Finance” presentation states bluntly: “Gross toll revenue on the DTR will need increase from approximately $65 million in 2008 to $87 million in 2010 and $220 million by 2020 to cover potential debt service costs.”

That’s because MWAA plan to issue $2,956m of DTR toll revenue bonds 2009 through 2013, nearly half of that in the next 18 months.

Other sources of money for the metro-rail line will be $2489m comprised: $900m federal grants, $275m Virginia state monies, Loudoun County $252m, Fairfax County $846m, MWAA airport money $215m.  The Dulles Toll Road contributes $2767m (53%) on this reckoning, about $190m less than the amount to be issued in toll revenue bonds – so they have some spare cash for reserves.

Traffic has been rather flat on the  Dulles Toll Road 2006 through 2008 at around 110m transactions/year (300k/day). 2005’s traffic volume has never been reached again.

2005 saw a toll increase, but from 2001 onward growth in traffic had been slight.

Baltimore Washington International Airport (BWI) has gained market share at the expense of Dulles and anti-growth policies in Fairfax and Loudoun counties have reduced the pace of new development in the corridor. Also competing tax supported roads such as I-66, VA7, VA28 have been improved.

1991 through 2001 were the boom years for the Dulles Toll Road with traffic growing from 137k transactions/day to 287k, a 110% increase. That’s 7% to 8% per year.

Those glory days are past.

BACKGROUND: Dulles Toll Road opened in 1985 and was widened progressively from 2 travel lanes each direction to 4 lanes per direction. It straddles the untolled Dulles Airport Access Highway of 2×2 lanes which opened with the Airport in 1965. DAAH has no offramps westbound and no onramps eastbound to prevent it being used by commuters who are serviced by the DTR tolled lanes.

The metro-rail Silver line, 37km (23 miles) in length with eleven stations is a spur off the existing Orange line at I-66 in Falls Church, proceeding in the median of the Dulles Toll Road/Airport Access Highway/ I-66 connector road almost to the Beltway, diverting south into Tysons Corner then heading back up to the Dulles Toll/Access Road running in the median to Dulles Airport, from there joining the Dulles Greenway, running in its median about a third the length of the Greenway terminating in Loudoun County at VA772.

On present plans MWAA will turn over the Silver line to Washington Metropolitan Area Transportation Authority (WMATA) to operate trains and bear the costs of operating losses.  WMATA runs the rest of the DC area metro-rail system, the second largest in the country after New York’s subways.

on the metro-rail project:

http://www.dullesmetro.com/

on Dulles Toll Road:

http://www.metwashairports.com/tollroad

TOLLROADSnews 2009-07-12

Toll opponents score a BIG one with Adkisson retaining power

Posted on by

Link to article here.

07/29/2009

Board’s toll-road backers suffer loss with vote

Scott Stroud – Express-News Columnist

After taking over as chairman of the Metropolitan Planning Organization, one of several local entities with a lot to say about San Antonio’s transportation future, Bexar County Commissioner Tommy Adkisson vowed to “declare war” on gobbledygook. But when it came time to explain the maneuvering that surrounded his installation as chairman, he went all murky.

Maybe this will help sort through the haze: MPO members who are open to toll roads got their butts kicked Monday.

Throughout the MPO’s history, the agenda for passing out road-building dollars has been controlled by its chairman. But Adkisson, a toll road critic, worries people on the other side enough that they proposed having the MPO’s executive committee set the agenda instead.

Anti-toll road Force of Nature Terri Hall spoke up to say this would require a bylaw change and, therefore, violated the state’s open meetings law because it wasn’t on the agenda. Turns out she was right.

Rep. David Leibowitz, D-San Antonio, an anti-toll road board member, moved that two issues — the nominating process and the agenda-setting authority — be “bifurcated,” so Adkisson could become chairman. The vote to separate them ended in a tie, after which Leibowitz said the agenda-setting change was outside the scope of the nomination committee’s jurisdiction and shouldn’t have happened.

Adkisson, who was already presiding because his predecessor, Sheila McNeil, had left the City Council, said grandly that there was “only one person who might see the inside of a Bexar County cooler” if something illegal took place. He was about to forge ahead with the bifurcating when City Councilwoman Jennifer Ramos reversed herself, voting to separate the issues.

At that point, Adkisson, who seemed to have planned his dance steps with Leibowitz, stood up, said, “I’m at the point where I have to turn into a pumpkin,” and left the room while the board voted. He returned as MPO chairman, his agenda-setting authority undiluted.

But then another funny thing happened. Before Hall could get to the lobby to declare victory before TV cameras, Adkisson — occasionally given to verbiage that borders on loopy — opted to “share a thought or two” on where he hoped to lead the MPO.

“When the day is done,” he began, “what we’re really trying to do in a macro sense is all about the red, white and blue.”

The goal is to improve the city, he explained, and, therefore, our great nation. He vowed to work with friends on “both sides of the aisle,” cut through the aforementioned gobbledygook and strive to make the world a better place.

County Commissioner Kevin Wolff, recognizing both defeat and an opportunity, applauded Adkisson’s remarks. In the spirit of such graciousness, he said, he hoped Adkisson would allow a vote on the procedural change.

Oh sure, Adkisson said.

Out in the lobby, however, both Leibowitz and Hall said they saw no reason to change things at all. And Adkisson, the warrior against gobbledygook, said a vote would be fine but called it “fixing something that isn’t broken.”

In layman’s terms: I win. You lose. And toll roads just took a step back.

New MPO Chair: "I will leverage heaven and earth" to fix 281 & 1604

Posted on by

Link to article here.

07/28/2009

MPO boss’ power remains intact

By Josh Baugh – Express-News
Bexar County Commissioner Tommy Adkisson, a toll-road opponent and environmentalist, took over as chairman of the Metropolitan Planning Organization on Monday and dodged an attempt to dilute his agenda-setting authority.Adkisson was in line for the chairmanship two years ago but lost the position to then-City Councilwoman Sheila McNeil. The MPO vote that installed McNeil broke the organization’s long-standing tradition of rotating the leadership role between city and county leaders.

Because of his toll-road opposition, Adkisson lost the chairmanship in 2007, when one MPO board member said the organization didn’t want its image tarnished by electing a toll critic to be its leader.

The MPO oversees about $200 million in federal transportation funding and must approve most transportation projects within the county.

On Monday, Adkisson said he would “leverage heaven and earth” to fix congestion at U.S. 281 and Loop 1604 on the city’s North Side and prioritize mass transit. He fell short of saying he would quash toll roads during his term but said he doesn’t think they work well.

“All the toll-road arrangements I’m seeing around the country are losing money and traffic,” he said. “And if you can imagine when you have an economy like this, and you have extrapolated into the future a revenue stream that depends on people supporting it, I think you have to be very careful.”

Though Adkisson and Councilman John Clamp were unanimously elected chairman and vice chairman, the board split on a vote on whether to take up the issue of agenda-setting authority. In the MPO’s three decades of existence, the board chairman always has set the agenda for the organization’s monthly meetings. It became an issue during McNeil’s term because she removed an item that state Rep. David Leibowitz, D-San Antonio, had placed on the agenda, declaring that as chairwoman she had absolute authority to do so.

County Commissioner Kevin Wolff recommended Monday that the board vote to give the agenda-setting power to the MPO’s executive committee, composed of the board chairman and board members representing the city, the county, the Texas Department of Transportation and VIA Metropolitan Transit.

Leibowitz floated a motion to vote only on the nominations and leave the agenda-setting discussion for another day. Initially, the board vote was a tie, but Councilwoman Jennifer Ramos later changed her vote, tipping the count in favor of Leibowitz’s plan.

Whether the policy change will be placed on an agenda remains to be seen. Adkisson, who currently has sole authority over the agenda, said he has no problem letting the full board take up the issue. At the same time, he sees no reason to change things.

“This MPO has been around since the early ’70s, and it’s never had an executive committee,” he said. “(Agenda-setting) has been within the sole province of the chairman. So it’s really fixing something that isn’t broken.”

Terri Hall, founder of Texans United for Reform and Freedom, said she and her supporters were gravely concerned with giving the power to a committee with a large contingent of non-elected members. She also said Monday’s meeting would have violated the Texas Open Meetings Act if the board had voted to begin the process of shifting the power away from Adkisson because the issue wasn’t properly announced on the MPO agenda.

Wolff, who says toll roads are a tool to ease congestion, disagreed. He said proper notice was given. More importantly, he said, the authority should be spread over an entire committee regardless of who happens to be chairman. Wolff said he would continue to push for the policy amendment.

But Hall said toll-road advocates are “trying to change the rules in the middle of the game.” Still, she was thrilled with Adkisson’s victory.

“This is a breath of fresh air for everybody in San Antonio,” she said.

Adkisson elected Chair, declares war on toll roads

Posted on by

IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Grassroots hail new Chair of MPO
Adkisson retains power to set agenda, declares war on toll roads

San Antonio, TX, Tuesday, July 28, 2009 – Commissioner Tommy Adkisson officially became Chair of the San Antonio-Bexar County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Monday, but not without the usual powerplays and controversy that have surrounded toll roads in San Antonio.  A proposal to change its bylaws to strip the Chair of the power to set the MPO agenda and give it to the Executive Committee, was thwarted, after an intense debate, due to the failure to properly place it on the agenda. But the media left believing all the fireworks had gone off only to MISS the flame that ignited later in the meeting over keeping 281 and 1604 in the toll plans.

Read Terri Hall’s article in the Examiner for details on the VICTORY, the players, and the betrayals here

-30-

Power grab at MPO…AGAIN! Plot to neuter toll opponent, Adkisson

Posted on by
07/25/2009

Toll-road opponent set to lead MPO

By Josh Baugh – Express-News
Bexar County Commissioner Tommy Adkisson, a toll-road critic and environmentalist, is poised to lead San Antonio’s Metropolitan Planning Organization, the agency that oversees how $200 million in federal transportation funds are spent in Bexar County.Whether Adkisson’s leadership will change the MPO’s bearings, however, remains an open question. He didn’t lay out an agenda for his term as chairman, but he made clear that mass transit is one of his priorities.“I think one of the things that’s painfully evident to me is that our mass transit, especially light rail, needs to be fast-forwarded,” he said.On Monday, the MPO board is expected to elect Adkisson. His two-year term likely will get under way with the toll-road debate on low heat. That wasn’t the case in 2007, when Adkisson was expected to be elected chairman but ultimately lost to then-Councilwoman Sheila McNeil.Though it’s not written in MPO policy, there’s been a gentlemen’s agreement that chairmanship of the board rotates between Bexar County and the city. But that’s not how it played out two years ago, after then-City Councilman Richard Perez left the board, which has 19 voting members that include elected and appointed officials and government staffers.

Back then, council members argued that Perez, a strong toll advocate, would have maintained the chairmanship if it weren’t for the City Council’s term limits. The council members on the MPO stacked the nominating committee and then chose one of their own to serve as chairwoman. They blocked Adkisson reportedly because of his opposition to toll roads.

Before Perez, the county and city had each had four-year stints in the chairman’s seat.

The MPO chairman doesn’t just run meetings. The chair traditionally has set the MPO’s meeting agendas, a powerful tool in deciding what does — and doesn’t — get done.

But that power is likely to be diluted at the same time Adkisson is nominated for the chairmanship.

County Commissioner Kevin Wolff, who serves on the MPO’s nominating committee, said he assumed the organization’s executive committee set the agenda.

“It turns out I was wrong,” he said. “A lot of it’s set by what’s actually required under state law, but the rest was just kind of arbitrary on behalf of the chair. Well, I see that as a huge problem, regardless of who’s the chair.”

Wolff said the nominating committee’s recommendation on Monday would be to elect Adkisson chairman and City Councilman John Clamp vice chairman, and leave agenda-setting to the four-member executive committee. Representatives from the Texas Department of Transportation and VIA Metropolitan Transit make up half the committee.

Toll critic Terri Hall, who balked at handing that much authority to non-elected officials, said she believes Adkisson’s would-be power is being slashed because of his toll opposition.

“That’s what they want — they want to dilute Tommy’s power,” she said. “They only think that having all the power in one person is suitable when they’re in charge. But when they’re not in charge, well, by golly, ‘We better diffuse that power because we don’t want someone like that running the board.’”

Clamp shrugged off the contention that Adkisson’s authority would be diluted because of his politics. “I just think the body should really help set the agenda — not just one person.”

Find this article at:
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/traffic/Toll-road_opponent_set_to_lead_MPO.html

Toll authority approves immediate 32% rate hike, automatic hikes every two years!

Posted on by

Link to article here.

The North Texas Tollway Authority (NTTA) is literally drowning in debt and can’t make it’s debt service payments without raising toll rates 32% in a down economy, yet it’s hard to feel sorry for them when they acted like high rollers on the taxpayers dime with its $42,000 junket to Austria.

The NTTA wouldn’t be in this mess were it not for being forced to bid against Spain-based, Cintra, in order to keep Hwy 121 in public hands. They had to come up with an up front “balloon” payment of over $3 billion and now it’s coming home to roost. Regardless of who got the rights to what was once called the “road to riches,” it’s the taxpayers who are on the hook to pay the tolls. The tolls would be even higher were Cintra in charge. Read about the coming 75 cent per mile toll Cintra will bleed out of motorists on LBJ and I-820 here. Add to that the fact Senator Robert Nichols added an amendment to his bill to GUARANTEE when a public road is sold to a private toll operator that the corporation NEVER LOSES money on the deal, you see how severely our politicians have sold out the taxpayers!

North Texas Tollway Authority OKs rate hike
Thursday, July 16, 2009
By MICHAEL A. LINDENBERGER / The Dallas Morning News
Tolls will jump about 32 percent on North Texas Tollway Authority toll roads Sept. 1, thanks to a 8-1 vote this morning by board members.

The new rates will be about 14.5 cents per mile on the President George Bush Turnpike, State Highway 121, now known as the Sam Rayburn Tollway, and the Dallas North Tollway.

In imposing the increase, the board turned aside, by a 7-2 vote, a proposal by board member Bob Day, a Dallas County appointee. Day wanted the increase to be phased in over time. Day voted against the increase.

The new rates will boost NTTA revenues about $14 million this year, and $43.5 million in 2010, and a steadily rising amount in every year beyond.

Director Dave Denison said he was concerned that the rate was in response to temporary conditions caused by the current recession, and will bring in more than is necessary to meet the agency’s obligations.

“I’m not absolutely fully convinced” that the 14.5 cent rate is necessary, Denison said.

“If we come out of the recession and are going great guns we may not need all this money,” he said.

Some board members also initially seemed opposed to wording in the new rate policy that nows sets an automatic toll rate increase every two years. Every two years from now on, rates will jump nearly 6 percent, without the need for a board vote.

The increase is necessary, CFO Janice Davis said, because NTTA’s revenues are no longer enough to meet obligations to creditors to whom NTTA owes about $6 billion. Bond convenants require NTTA revenues to be at least 1.5 times its debt payments. Without the increases, the agency would likely not meet that obligation in the next couple years.

The automatic increases are necessary, too, or else NTTA’s ability to borrow more money to build new roads will be constrained, staff and financial advisors said. Previously, toll rates were reviewed only every five years.

NTTA’s financial squeeze is due to a combination of factors: while total traffic numbers are up, they are lower than expected; collections from drivers without toll tags have been less successful than expected; and fewer drivers on the new Sam Rayburn Tollway have signed up for toll tags.

TxDOT to forgive toll fines…but just this once

Posted on by

Link to article here.

This is a one-sided, TxDOT slanted story. When TxDOT isn’t sending the toll bills to the right address, when they send you to collections after the first notice, when they fine the owners of the vehicles and not the actual driver’s who commit the offense, and when they refuse to negotiate down any of the fines even in the case of mistakes, it’s high time TxDOT do something to remedy the highway robbery. This is the testimony we’ve heard from dozens of Texas motorists who are experiencing nothing short of usury from our highway department. Read this story about a woman who racked up $11,000 in fines.

TxDOT may forgive tens of millions in toll fines
Proposed ‘amnesty’ would offer forgiveness of most accummulated fees and fines, but scofflaws would have to pay the overdue tolls and get a TxTag.
By Ben Wear
AMERICAN-STATESMAN
Tuesday, July 14, 2009

Central Texas toll scofflaws could get a pass on paying much of $56.1 million in late fees and fines under a still-in-the-works “amnesty” policy set for a vote July 30 by the Texas Transportation Commission.

The partial break on the surcharges, which can reach almost $450 per toll, probably would be tied to nonpayers’ signing up for a TxTag, the electronic device affixed to windshields that allows a motorist to be charged instantly for tolls. The tardy tolls would still be due in full.

On Monday, Texas Department of Transportation officials were not yet ready to reveal the exact extent of the fine discounts under the amnesty.

Mark Tomlinson, TxDOT’s turnpike division director, said that nonpayers would be asked to pay only a “small percentage” of the accumulated fees and fines. Experience with other toll agencies has shown that it takes a substantial reduction to entice violators to come forward, Tomlinson said. And he said the agency already offers nonpayers 50 percent off fees if they pay their tolls in full and sign up for a TxTag.

The amnesty period, which would apply to TxDOT’s four Austin tollways and one in Tyler, would last one to two months, officials said.

According to TxDOT, 140,000 “accounts” — individual vehicle owners — have failed to pay 2.1 million toll charges, for a total of $3.2 million in unpaid tolls. The potential fees and fines associated with those charges, the amount subject to the amnesty: $58.4 million.

Those figures include the Tyler toll road, which has about $60,000 of unpaid tolls and $2.3 million in pending fees and fines.

TxDOT’s uncollected money is overwhelmingly from the Central Texas toll roads.

Tomlinson said the agency probably would begin referring some of the cases, those involving chronic nonpayers, to local justice of the peace courts shortly after the amnesty period ends. What about people who might assume that yet another amnesty is down the road and continue to ignore toll bills?

“It would be an absolute mistake for anyone to think in those terms,” Tomlinson said. “Our administration has made it absolutely clear that this will be a one-time offer.”

The first three of TxDOT’s four Austin-area toll roads — Loop 1, Texas 45 North and Texas 130 — opened in November 2006, and the agency began charging motorists in January 2007. The first violators were eligible for referral to court almost two years ago.

TxDOT’s other area road, Texas 45 Southeast, which opened this spring, began charging customers only last month and thus would not yet have any violators teed up for a court appearance.

The Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority, which opened Austin’s fifth toll road, 183-A, in March 2007, began justice of the peace referrals in January and so far has taken 47 of its worst offenders to court.

Why has it taken so long for TxDOT to begin using the court system for unpaid tolls? Spokeswoman Karen Amacker said the agency focused initially on its invoicing and collections efforts, which are handled by an outside contractor, the Washington Group, and then on helping the mobility authority begin referring toll cases to court. In addition, she said, TxDOT has to work with several justice of the peace offices — rather than just one, as the mobility authority does — because its 66 miles of Central Texas toll roads extend over a much larger area.

In addition, Tomlinson said, “We’ve tried to operate with the philosophy of making good toll-paying customers, and we’ve tried to avoid having to take big violation fees. Certainly, taking people to court is the last resort.”

TxDOT’s turnpike division has fewer than 40 employees and has seen significant turnover at the top over the past year or so. Tomlinson replaced longtime tollway chief Phil Russell about a year ago at roughly the same time as toll operations director David Powell left for a private sector job. Powell’s position has not been filled.

In addition, TxDOT has undergone a tumultuous two years because of a $1.1 billion accounting error and opposition to its use of private toll road leases, creating an inauspicious political environment for taking citizens to court over unpaid tolls.

The fees and fines for a single toll can be substantial.

People who go through a tolling point on a TxDOT road without a TxTag or without stopping to pay with cash would get two invoices within 45 days, each carrying a $1 administrative fee. Failure to pay after 75 days raises the fee to $5. Then at day 112 the unpaid toll goes to a collection agency, and the fee jumps to $25.

Going to a justice of the peace court, which would occur at the 200-day mark when TxDOT begins to refer unpaid tolls, could cost a nonpayer almost $450 for each toll.

Government could "deactivate" your vehicle for failure to pay road taxes

Posted on by

Link to article here.
This sobering and frightening scenario is just over the horizon unless citizens wake-up and put a stop to it!

Government control goes that extra mile
By Henry Lamb
World Net Daily
July 11, 2009

Sara was late for work. The alarm clock didn’t alarm, the kids were unusually slow getting ready for school, and nothing went right. She finally got to her car – a brand new 2020 Chevy Adventure. She touched the finger-print secured start button. Nothing. It wouldn’t start. She touched it again. Nothing. Furious, she banged the steering wheel with her fist. Then she noticed the paper hanging from the receipt printer on the dash.

“Your designated visa account rejected your Road Use Tax in the amount of $87.32 for the month of June, 2020. You must insert a valid account card to activate your automobile.”

It’s coming. With a $16 million grant from the federal government, the University of Iowa is developing a Global Positioning Satellite system that can measure the mileage, apply a variable tax rate that will increase during rush hours and in high-traffic areas, calculate the total, charge a designated account card, and shut down your automobile if unpaid when due. Some 2,700 automobiles in five states will be used in the test.

The system has been under development for more than a decade. The concept was proven in a similar, but smaller test in Oregon two years ago. The new tax system is being designed to replace the outdated by-the-gallon tax. Government mandated higher-mileage requirements result in less tax revenue for all governments. Hybrid and all-electric cars contribute little or nothing to road tax revenues.

The new by-the-mile tax system will give government much more than a new tax collection mechanism; it will give government much greater control over everyone.

The new GM – Government Motors – can install this new system in all of its vehicles. All that’s needed is an instruction from the car czar. Automakers that have not yet been taken over by the government can be required to install the system quite easily, by regulation or legislation. With such a system in every vehicle, the government can have virtual control over the population.

Purchase of a vehicle will give the government a database containing the name and residence location of every automobile owner. Since the system has the ability to record and track the geographic location of the vehicle at every moment of the day or night – only for the purpose of applying the correct tax rate, of course – government can know where your vehicle is at any moment.

Frightened yet? This is not hocus-pocus conspiracy-theory nonsense. The National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission has unanimously endorsed the scheme. A past president of the Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials says several states have considered not waiting for the federal government and will implement this system within their states. It is on the horizon and currently targeted for implementation by 2020.

This system will give the government the power to know your every movement. Where does the Constitution authorize the government to exercise this power? How does the exercise of this power square with the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment guarantee of a right to privacy? Does anybody care?

Privacy concerns have kept the project out of the public spotlight, but not out of the lab. As the project matures, there will be the obligatory lip-service to “prohibiting” the government from using the capability to invade individual privacy. “Assurances” will be mouthed, from both the administration and the Congress, that the rights of individuals will be protected. And the program will move forward.

Imagine this scenario: a police station in Podunk, New Jersey gets a silent alarm that a bank robbery is in progress at the corner of 4th Avenue and Main Street. The chief radios the regional Road Tax Monitoring Center, and immediately, every vehicle in the vicinity is disabled. The police arrive at the scene to find the robbers sitting in their vehicle banging on the steering wheel of an automobile that won’t start. The press lauds this wonderful new technology.

Now imagine this scenario: a detective knocks on your door. “Your vehicle was parked on 2nd Avenue Saturday evening between 10:32 and 11:15 pm. Why?”

“It’s none of your business,” you protest.

You are informed that there was a crime committed in the neighborhood and until you can explain why you were there, you are a suspect. You are in the position of having to prove your innocence rather than the state having to prove your guilt.

There is no end to the mischief that government can impose upon the people with this system. Government could control when and where people go simply by adjusting the tax rate. Government could force people to use public transportation, by adjusting the tax rate. Government could deactivate vehicles as a form of punishment for unpaid speeding or parking tickets. Government could easily dictate the type of vehicle you drive, simply by adjusting the tax rate on GM vehicles.

Those who think these scenarios are far-fetched have not been watching what the federal government has been doing, especially since the new Democratic socialists have taken control of Washington. It’s going to take more than tea parties to prevent this “change” that is being imposed. It’s going to take a determined electorate to throw the bums out!

Foreign-owned toll roads not dead yet…lawmakers vow to resurrect

Posted on by

Link to article here.

Mr. “Pro-Toll Tax” and lobbyist-in-chief, Bill Noble, needs to do a simple glance at our web site to see we’re all about non-toll solutions and have offered them for years. They don’t like our solutions, so they dismiss them. However, the taxpayers deserve the most affordable transportation solutions, not the most expensive one that he and Rep. Larry Phillips are advocating: foreign-owned toll roads.

CDAs ‘not dead yet’ opponents, supporters say
by Andy Hogue
Sun, Jul 12, 2009
Dallas Morning News blog

Two billion dollars and another two years of life isn’t a bad deal for the Texas Department of Transportation, is it?

It depends on with whom you speak.

Besides losing the ability to continue transportation comprehensive development agreements (CDAs), the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) and the Perry administration also lost a great deal of political capital and bargaining power after the special legislative session.

The Legislature renewed TxDOT without much in terms of reforms, but did not approve a bill continuing a list of 13 CDAs — effectively calling a time-out on a six-year expansion of toll roads.

This raises a few questions as to where things are going next with transportation.

Surely, $2 billion in recently released Proposition 12 funds won’t last forever in building freeways. So the next two-to-four years are still anyone’s game, and both sides in the toll road debate agree that CDAs aren’t dead — nor is TxDOT giving in.

What projects were stopped?

At least two CDA toll projects will be preserved through 2011 under SB 792 from the 80th session — Highway 161 in Dallas and the Grand Parkway loop around Houston. While forging a deal on those projects may continue, most other CDAs will expire Sept. 1.

A lifeline was cast to 13 projects during the special session as part of SB 3, which would have extended their CDAs on a project-by-project basis. There was not enough legislative will to see the whole list through (LSR, July 3), but members attempted to compromise with a short list — only those projects already agreed to by the North Texas Tollway Authority (NTTA), namely managed lanes on I-35 East, Highway 183 and I-30 in the DFW area.

Bill Noble, executive director of the pro-CDA Texans for Safe and Reliable Transportation, said CDAs made Highway 130 bypass around Austin possible, for example. Projects like I-69 were casualties.

There were 87 toll road projects implemented in Texas, per discussion during the 80th legislative session in 2007. According to committee testimony during the 80th interim, about 400 toll projects were being considered. So is it possible that, by the Legislature’s not continuing CDAs, that nearly 300 would-be toll roads were prevented? Terri Hall of Texans United for Reform and Freedom (TURF), a TxDOT watchdog, thinks so (at least for now).

“I do think that they [toll road lobbyists] are going to keep trying to bring CDAs back up, as there’s so much money behind them. So it’s up to the taxpayers to remain vigilant,” she said. “CDAs are the more expensive tool in the toolbox. But that’s the one they keep reaching for.”

Does TxDOT have any clout left?

Hall claims the support of a large movement of taxpayers who oppose the expansion of toll roads and accumulation of debt from CDA agreements. Noble said he’s certain toll roads remain a popular transportation option among voters as a “tool” in the aforementioned toolbox.

“We want all the tools — and that includes gas tax and indexing,” Noble said. “But we don’t believe that a massive gas tax would be politically viable, and that’s what would be required if you didn’t have the option of toll roads.”

Hall said allowing international conglomerates (such as Cintra of Spain) to own and manage toll roads in private, behind-closed-doors contracts is less politically viable than proposing upping the gas tax.

TxDOT declined to comment.

Rep. Larry Phillips (R-Sherman) thinks there’s plenty of room left for TxDOT to negotiate its future — as well as an extra session in which to debate meaty issues.

“We will need to build roads in the future, and I think that will be the debate over the next two sessions on how we build those roads,” Phillips said.

One option to continue CDAs in the future is to give the Legislature oversight over each individual project — a method Phillips said might prove burdensome.

Phillips called for a greater role of toll authorities, such as NTTA and the Harris County Toll Road Authority (HCTRA), in the approval process, as a check on TxDOT.

“Conventional wisdom is that projects may be approved on a case-by-case basis rather than a blanket authority through TxDOT,” Noble said. “But that’s a cumbersome process … at the end of the day, Texans are going to realize that roads are not going to get better unless all options are on the table, including toll roads.”

Noble said TxDOT’s overall standing has been lowered since mid-decade, but there has been some rebound under the leadership of TTC Chair Deirdre Delisi.

“We did some polling when I first got involved, and back then TxDOT was a highly credible entity. And Texans really had a high opinion — far greater than lawmakers,’” Noble said. “And some of that has come down, especially with leadership. But under the leadership of Delisi and Amadeo Saenz, we’ve seen a sea change — that being, they appreciate the openness, the responsiveness, and the efforts to work with Legislature to find solutions. And you look at it in what the Legislature could have done as far as radical changes in Sunset, all that really didn’t happen.”

At least until 2011, TxDOT continues to have a friend in the Governor—most recently exemplified by a veto of HB 2142, which would have prevented TxDOT from advertising the use of toll roads.

“Marketing toll roads as a user-fee-based alternative to congested highways is important to relieving congestion on other state roads and keeping Texas moving,” Gov. Rick Perry said in his veto proclamation, echoing TxDOT’s ad campaign slogan “Keep Texas Moving.”

U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, likely Perry’s biggest major challenger in the GOP primary for Texas Governor, called for federal legislation to ban tolls on federally owned roadways — a sign that transportation will be a key issue in the 2010 gubernatorial campaign.

Will anti-toll road movements keep on?

Noble said anti-toll-road activists, now that they have their way for at least another two years, are going to have to provide solutions — solutions that may not prove popular with their own volunteers. “The only other way to relieve congestion is a massive gas tax increase,” he said. “Opponents of toll roads are slowly beginning to trickle out when faced with the question of ‘what’s your answer?’”

Many conservative opponents of toll roads were leery of Sen. John Carona’s (R-Dallas) solution in the form of the Local Option Transportation Plan – most vocal were concerns that the gas tax would be raised in large communities.

True, a motor fuels tax increase (or index to inflation) won’t be popular with some conservatives, Hall said. But there are more issues at stake in her organization than just the CDAs vs. the gas tax debate, such as transparency in contracts.

“Our legislators often don’t have a clue what’s in these contracts — they have no idea what they’re selling off,” Hall said, noting that a Cintra contract for the North Tarrant Express near Fort Worth had a charge of 75 cents per mile at peak hours.

“We’re all in favor of a motor fuels tax increase,” she said. “But you have to end [Fund 6] diversions before we give you more money. Also, we’ve got to reform TxDOT — getting into the books, looking into the finances, and basically gutting the agency … Until they change the culture at TxDOT, they will continue to have problems and blowback from the public.”

What message was sent by the 81st?

A simple message was sent by the refusal of the Legislature to approve CDAs in the 81st regular and special sessions: CDAs are still highly suspect. Whether or not the Legislature’s inaction on CDAs was a referendum on their viability as a transportation solution is debatable.

“I don’t think the special session was specifically that,” Phillips said. “I think that referendum occurred during the regular session on the Sunset bill. And it’s pretty clear that the Legislature wants us to have a transparent process, and that it becomes understandable to the public on how roads are being built … and how MPOs interact with the state, environmental studies are conducted, etc. … It’s fairly difficult in such a short time frame to hash these things out and discuss them [CDAs]. The question was in 2007 can we slow down and take some time in the interim to look at it. So tapping on the brake is not such a bad thing for now.”

Noble, who said there has been a “thoroughly inadequate hearing on CDAs” in recent sessions, agreed there is room to haggle. “I think it’s a clean slate for us — we know where we stand now, and for a few years,” Noble said.

“I don’t see that CDAs are dead,” Phillips said, “as long as we make sure they’re approved by a local community.”

Nichols deliberately misleads about ties to TTC lobbyist to protect private toll operators

Posted on by

Link to story and to view the two-part news video, go here.

This CBS News expose of Senator Robert Nichols’ efforts to protect private toll road investors instead of taxpayers is spot-on. However, Senator Kevin Eltife says he’s against foreign-owned toll roads on camera, but he voted FOR every bill and amendment that would hand our public roads to private toll operators on the floor of the Texas Senate. Why won’t politicians tell the truth and defend the taxpayers over the special interests? We MUST hold them accountable! To read more specifics about how Nichols brokered this deal with a lobbyist, go here.

Senator Robert Nichols and Toll Roads
By Roger Gray

In the last legislative session, the future of toll roads was on the line.

But one area state senator was more involved than most. In fact some critics say the fix was in.

“You can’t do toll roads in rural Texas. It won’t work,” says State Senator Kevin Eltife.

Yes, the original Trans Texas Corridors were huge, and controversial.

Whitehouse rancher and toll road critic Hank Gilbert called it, “the largest land grab in the history of the U.S.”

Senator Eltife agreed. “It’s a total property right’s mess.”

Gilbert added, “I don’t think the people of Texas, rural and urban, are going to allow that to happen.”

And Austin seemed to get the message.

“I think there’s no question, the Trans Texas corridor is dead,” Eltife concluded.

But some advocates clung to the idea of foreign companies building and running toll roads as private enterprises.

Eltife is an opponent. “They should never be owned by a private company, ever. That’s a gold mine for the state.”

As is Gilbert, of Texans United for Reform and Freedom. “Comprehensive Development Agreements that would allow private investors to come in, plan, build, operate, maintain, the whole nine yards.”

Eltife agreed, “The state ought to own them. They ought to be a small piece of the puzzle.”

State Senator Robert Nichols “seemed” to agree when we spoke to him by phone during the session.

“The people of East Texas are clear,” he said. “They do not want the East Texas Corridor. But they do want to develop Interstate 69.”

But did Sen. Nichols want to insure that private toll road contracts were a part of that I-69 development? He added an amendment to his transportation bill that seems to guarantee a contractor couldn’t lose money.

Gilbert explained, “You have one of our own East Texas Republican senators is offering an amendment to his own bill which would guarantee a profit. To me that kind of goes against capitalism.”

Nichols, though, disagreed. “There is language related to buy backs, but there is absolutely no guarantee whatever that anybody will ever get any of their debt back.”

But, we have a copy of an e-mail sent out by toll road lobbyist Gary Bushell, and it says,

“…we have reached an agreement with Senator Nichols on a buyout provision…that provides protection of their position in the event they find themselves upside down on their debt to fair market value…I want to thank Senator Robert Nichols and his chief of staff Steven Albright for making this outcome possible.”

Nichols doesn’t think that’s what he did. “Well, it’s incorrect, because that’s not true.”

Gilbert concluded, “That’s not very free market.”

So, according to one lobbyist, Senator Robert Nichols went to bat for private toll road contractors.

“That’s crazy,” he protested. “No. I don’t know who told you that, but that’s nuts.”

I responded, “Well, I’ve got an email from a lobbyist who says that’s exactly what you did.”

Nichols again disagreed, “Well, it’s incorrect, because that’s not true.”

“So this lobbyist is wrong,” I replied.

“If that’s your interpretation of what he says,” Nichols responded. “I’m not looking at whatever it is you’re reading.”

“I read you exactly what he said, ” I said. “that provides protection of their position in the event they find themselves upside down on their debt to fair market value.'”

“Ok, I did not write that.” He concluded.

Toll road critic Hank Gilbert is skeptical.

“At any point in time, this developer comes to the realization that they’re not getting the return on investment they anticipated from this road, they can sell it back to the state at that time and with this amendment, they’re guaranteed not to lose money.”

Nichols again protested, “If you’re saying the State of Texas or any entity is going to guarantee an investor his money back, no. Not correct.”

But we have a copy of the amendment and it says.

“.the fair market value of the private entity’s interest…is not less than the (entity’s) outstanding debt at that time plus other reasonable costs.”

In short, they get out at least what they’ve put in.

So why would Nichols continue beating the toll road drum? The explanation may lie in his contributor list.

His top donor by far, James Pitcock of Williams Brothers Construction of Houston, the second largest TxDOT contractor for toll roads.

But Nichols still insists toll roads aren’t a certainty.

“So, it’s your contention that even though these CDA’s, comprehensive development agreements are in HB300,” I asked, “we’re not talking toll roads for East Texas.”

“Well, now, that’s a different question.” He replied. “You have toll roads in Tyler.”

And Robert Nichol’s tried to push these CDA’s again in the special session last week. He didn’t succeed.

Apparently, as long as the political money is there, toll road advocates will keep pitching.