Letter to Editor: TxDOT, our village idiots

TxDOT idiocy
Letter to Editor
San Antonio Express News
June 11, 2008

Mark Freeman asked, “Who could possibly be in their right minds to create a stretch of highway with so many stoplights and no overpasses?” regarding his drive on Loop 1604 between U.S. Highway 90 and Braun Road (“Traffic woes,” Your Turn, Friday).

People are now sporting bumper stickers that read, “Every village has its idiot — we have TxDOT,” and that seems to sum it up as we travel in our congested mess. Look at U.S. Highway 281 North from Loop 1604 — just another prime example of the village idiots at work. While we were busy working and taking care of our families, we all fell victim to Gov. Rick Perry’s and TxDOT’s agenda.

The goal was to make us all so miserable and exhausted from our travel we would beg them for toll roads and the Trans-Texas Corridor for relief. Now is the time to demand accountability and to get out the “old school” starting from the top down and put common sense back into road construction.

The Transportation Commission has made rumblings and pledged to open up TxDOT’s financial records and ban clauses that restrict improvements of existing roads as part of tolling contracts and other offenses, but it has yet to deliver. We need to hold them accountable. We need elected officials to represent the taxpayers, and on a local level we need an elected Metropolitan Planning Organization board, not appointed cronies. If we don’t do anything, I guess we are the village idiots.

B.A. Ross
San Antonio

TxDOT, public agencies officially take-up lobbying for PPPs on taxpayer dime

For Immediate Release

New Public-Private Coalition Strives to Transform U.S. Transportation System in 2009

WASHINGTON, D.C. (June 5, 2008) – An unprecedented alliance of regional and state government, finance, academic and private industry leaders today announced the formation of a new coalition that will strive to transform the nation’s transportation system in 2009 utilizing a combination of public and private-sector solutions.

The creation of the Transportation Transformation Group – also known as the T2 – was announced by former U.S. House Majority Leader Richard Gephardt; Gen. Barry R. McCaffrey of HNTB Companies, former Commander-In-Chief of the U.S. Southern Forces Command and Cabinet-level director of the White House Drug “Czar” Policy Office; Texas Transportation Commissioner Ned Holmes; Dr. Joseph M. Giglio, Senior Academic Specialist and Executive Professor of General Management at Northeastern University in Boston; and Washington, D.C-based Pollster Thomas Riehle during a news conference at the National Press Club.

“It’s about time we add a fresh set of ideas to the transportation policy debate,” said Gephardt, representing T2 member Goldman Sachs. “If we don’t, communities across America will continue to be plagued by increased traffic congestion, deteriorating roads and bridges, safety issues and air pollution – all of which have an effect on our quality of life and our prosperity.”

The coalition’s goals include educating Americans about the benefits of new transportation delivery options and garnering support for innovative financing techniques as a part of a diverse strategy that will meet America’s transportation needs today and in the future.

Next year the U.S. Highway Trust Fund is expected to go bankrupt. Coalition members agree the way federal transportation funding is allocated needs to change.

“T2 supports the transformation of American transportation policy, not just a reauthorization of current policies,” said McCaffrey, who serves on the board of directors of T2 member HNTB Companies, one of the most prominent engineering, architecture and planning firms in the nation. “We believe that future investment should be closely examined, system planning should be performance-based, and that Congress must establish a long-range vision of surface transportation that considers all modes of moving people and goods around the country.”

Prior to considering any increase in the federal gasoline tax, coalition members urge Congress to enable states to employ business strategies and innovative finance techniques that help meet the nation’s transportation goals. That may include tolling, congestion pricing, HOT lanes, vehicle miles traveled pricing, and the full range of other public private partnership mechanisms that bring additional resources to bear in solving their transportation challenges. The business strategy must also include a focus on customer service that emphasizes reduced door-to-door travel time, greater travel time reliability, and smoother transition between various modes of transportation.

“We should spend better, not simply spend more,” Gephardt said. “We need to move forward from a system that has served our nation well for 50 years but falls short in addressing the challenges of the next 50 years. We need a federal program that sets meaningful goals and frees states, regions and localities to reach them through innovations in design, delivery and finance.”

T2 members represent both urban and rural constituencies, and support the need to provide transportation investment in both urban and rural areas. The coalition believes that local and regional leaders should be responsible for resolving transportation problems that are local and regional in nature. They should have maximum flexibility to make local and regional decisions.

“If states are given latitude to innovate, then it is possible to adequately sustain rural areas that rely heavily on fuel taxes for their needs,” said Holmes. “For instance, if metropolitan areas can raise and capture user-based revenue, it protects fuel tax supported maintenance and connectivity initiatives in rural regions. Innovative procurement reform has the potential to reduce costs and delivery times.”

In addition, the future transportation system should aggressively advance the adoption of new intelligent transportation system technologies, while maintaining the flexibility to adapt to emerging technologies.

A recent nationwide survey shows while the public does not yet perceive a “traffic crisis” in most parts of America, 59 percent express at least some concern about traffic problems in their area (rating traffic problems as a 4 or more on a 0-to-10 scale), and majorities say traffic has gotten worse over the past five years and will get worse in the next five years.

“Transportation is rarely rated as a crisis because most Americans deal with the problem by heaving a sigh, resigning to the inevitable and leaving for work a little earlier. Yet, solving the problem is a silent prerequisite for achieving many of America’s economic and social goals. T2 aspires to advance the dialogue by helping educate the public on the availability of innovative solutions that improve the daily lives of Americans,” said Giglio, senior academic specialist and executive professor of General Management at Northeastern University in Boston, Mass., and author of the book, ““Driving Questions: Developing a National Transportation Vision.”

An overwhelming majority of Americans (73 percent) oppose a $1 per gallon increase in fuel taxes as recommended by the National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission, even if the money were to be used only for transportation projects. Fifty-eight percent would favor allowing governments to partner with private sector companies who have access to investment and technology to help finance, construct and operate transportation projects.

The results of the survey, conducted by the polling firm RT Strategies in Washington, D.C., between April 17 and 20, were unveiled at the coalition kick-off event. A total of 1,000 respondents were interviewed. The margin of error for the data collected was +/- 3.5 percent.

T2 will serve as an umbrella group under which disparate organizations and interests who share a desire for safe and efficient transportation policies can unite. There are 20 founding members of the coalition from across the nation, including Texas and Florida – two of the nation’s most populous states – as well as Indiana and Utah, known innovators in transportation planning strategies.

# # #

About T2
The Transportation Transformation Group (T2) is a coalition of state government, finance, academic and private industry leaders who aspire to transform American transportation policy into a goal-based arrangement that maximizes flexibility to enhance the roles of the state and local public sectors and their private partners to solve the growing problems of congestion and mobility. To learn more about T2, visit the coalition’s Web site at >www.trans2group.com.

*********

Who We Are

The Transportation Transformation Group is an unprecedented alliance of state government, finance, academic and private industry leaders who aspire to transform American transportation policy into a goal-based arrangement that maximizes flexibility to enhance the roles of the state and local public sectors and their private partners to solve the growing problems of congestion and mobility.

Banc of America Securities LLC
Econolite Group, Inc.
Goldman, Sachs & Co.
HNTB Corp.
JP Morgan
MARKIV Industries
Morgan Stanley
Northeastern University
Nossaman Guthner Knox & Elliott LLP
TCB AECOM
Pioneer Institute
Reason Foundation
The Office of Governor Mitch Daniels
The Office of Governor Rick Perry
Port of Houston
Florida Department of Transportation
Indiana Department of Transportation
North Texas Tollway Authority
Texas Department of Transportation
Utah Department of Transportation

Iconoclast story highlights grassroots, freedom movement through TURF

Link to article here.

The Webster Retort
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
By Stephen C. Webster, Austin Bureau Chief

Tough TURF
Grassroots Group Tripping Up ‘North American Union’Interview With Terri Hall,
Founder Of Texans Uniting For Reform And Freedom

AUSTIN, Texas — In the United States today, and particularly in Texas, the average citizen feels powerless. If they vote, there is reasonable questions as to whether the ballots were properly counted. If they protest, nothing changes except their chances of getting skin cancer. If they petition their government, they receive pre-written form letters back from their representatives encouraging them to sit down, shut up and stay in line. Basically.

So, what happens when one average citizen — in this case, a homeschooling wife and mother of (soon to be) seven children from San Antonio — goes off the activist’s deep end? Can one person really make a difference?

Terri Hall is proof positive that the God-given, American rights to free speech, a free press and free assembly are still the most powerful weapons in the world when properly employed. In 2007, Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom, or TURF for short, officially convened its first meeting and set about planning a taxpayer revolt against the political class in Austin.

TURF’s unity cause: Gov. Rick Perry’s controversial plans for a privatized, tolled highway infrastructure best known as the Trans-Texas Corridor. But it has gradually expanded since then, as Hall and her associates uncovered more and more about the North American SuperCorridor Coalition and what she says are plans to control Americans’ right to travel and enhance the North American transportation infrastructure to such a degree that the United States, Canada and Mexico are indistinguishable from one another; in essence, one country and one economy, the North American Union

So far, the group has been wildly successful at bringing together activists of all stripes under one umbrella. With the help of Hank Gilbert, a Democrat who unsuccessfully ran for Texas agriculture commissioner in 2006, Hall’s group has aligned 9/11 Truth’ers with Bush Republicans, immigration reform advocates with old-school peace’nics, farmers with city folk, radical leftists with fringe right extremists, and so many others. But her mission will not be complete until the Trans-Texas Corridor, and plans for a North American Union, is no longer on the books.

Recently, The Lone Star Iconoclast had an opportunity to speak at length with Mrs. Hall about her crusade. That interview follows.

………

ICONOCLAST: TURF is, by many accounts, a very quickly growing, extremely effective protest group, with its core focus on stopping the construction of the Trans-Texas Corridor. What lit your fuse? How did you first get involved in this issue?

TERRI HALL: It all started when I attended a TxDOT hearing around the corner from my house. That’s when I first heard they were going to convert an existing freeway — U.S. 281 — into a toll road. It made no sense to me. I saw it as a tax grab, because that’s precisely what it is. It made no sense to start tolling a road when it is already bought and paid for.

Of course, their excuse was that they were making improvements to it and that sort of thing. But there were some things said at that hearing that really put up some red flags for me. There was a gentleman who was trying to question TxDOT as to the format of the meeting. And they’re usually scripted. They don’t answer questions, they just take public comments at the mic, and they have to answer those questions, usually in some kind of public paper.

So, they run their responses as public announcements in a newspaper well after the hearing, and there’s no Q&A. There is no public dialog between TxDOT and the people. They do a scripted thing because they have to hold the same and identical meeting at every stop.

Anyway, this gentleman got up and was questioning this woman with TxDOT and saying, “Hey, these roads are already paid for. We passed laws on the ballot back in 2001, and we were told this thing was paid for, either by foreign money or gas taxes.” Of course, they wouldn’t answer his questions.

So, I ended up holding a meeting with the district engineer for the San Antonio region and started asking those questions. But, they were mum on those details. So through a supporter, I got a hold of the original documents from TxDOT. That’s when we found out, for sure, that shows yes, in fact, the money has been funded and has been there to fix 281 where needed; to make improvements to that road with gas tax money. But they put the whole thing on hold in 2003, simply because they want the money.

Once we found out how egregious this was, I knew it would take organizing people. All I had to do was tap into that anger that was in the room that night, at that meeting. I knew there were hoards of other citizens that felt the way I did, and my family did. The more I talked to my state senator, state rep, legislators and everybody, I knew they were going to blow off any kind of public opposition, especially if its just one person. But, if we organized, we would have a better shot at getting them to listen.

That’s when we started forming this group. We’ve been at it since March of 2005. Our first real, official meeting was in June of 2005, and it started as an offshoot of the Texas Toll Party in Austin. We were the San Antonio Toll Party, and we kinda ran our own local thing, trying to kill the projects here. Then I realized what TURF was supposed to be from the beginning: Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom.

The idea behind it was to have some kind of large, umbrella group that would help bring in some of these other groups from around the state so that we could really be a force to be reckoned with in the legislature so that we could get something passed that would put a stop to this stuff. And that means, not just the urban tolls, but the Trans-Texas Corridor as well.

San Antonio is unique in that we are not just getting the urban toll road assault, at the eastern edge of Bexar County is also the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 project. We’re one region that will be affected by both, and Houston has joined that because around the west side of Houston, the grand parkway is going to connect up to TTC-69, and of course through the Victoria area, and Waller and Wharton. TTC-69 is going to come through there. And while it doesn’t touch Harris County, it is becoming a hot issue in those urban areas, as well as rural.

ICONOCLAST: TURF’s most recent action in Austin, which the Iconoclast covered in its April 9, 2008 edition, exhibited this umbrella nature of your group. There were 9/11 Truth activists standing shoulder-to-shoulder with Bush Republicans, and Ron Paul revolutionaries holding casual conversation with Obama-maniacs. You might call it a rainbow coalition, but these groups would otherwise never be caught associating with each other.

HALL: [laughs] Isn’t that interesting? But that’s right! We’ve got people from the left, right, and everywhere in-between. We’ve got groups like the Eagle Forum working with unions! And environmental groups working with anti-tax advocates. There’s a whole host of people interested in this issue. I think what it really comes down to is our government trying to take away our freedom to travel. And certainly trying to exert a massive amount of control over our freedom to travel, whether it’s urban or rural, we’re all uniting under the same umbrella for the same reason.

Eminent domain abuse in one part of the state is eminent domain abuse everywhere else. We all know that when we open the can of worms in one place, it will be opened elsewhere, and it will spread like a canker, like every bad idea in government tends to do. It has really brought people together of all political stripes and walks of life; people who would never work together, or even speak to each other, are fighting for a single cause: to preserve our freedom to travel and hopefully put a stop to this abusive, overbearing government that we’re seeing.

I’m a wife and homeschooling mother of six kids, and expecting a seventh. So, I have lots on my plate at home, and I certainly have better things to be doing with my time than be a watchdog on government, but this has really become a personal struggle for me, because we can see the expansive impact these policies have, not just on us, but future generations. They are literally taking out a second mortgage on our transportation system and putting our infrastructure under the control of foreign companies. Then they’re asking our kids and grandkids to pay this back, just to pave over Texas with an unneeded road. It is unbelievable.

Now, I wouldn’t argue that there isn’t congestion in some of our urban areas that needs to be addressed. But taking 580,000 acres of private Texas farm land and turning it over to a foreign company to toll us for the rest of our lifetimes. That is not the solution.

ICONOCLAST: Since starting TURF and moving beyond the Texas Toll Party, you have discovered a number of startling things about TxDOT. TURF also has a number of ongoing lawsuits against TxDOT. What have you discovered, and what is the status of those suits?

HALL: We have three lawsuits pending right now; two in federal court and one in state court. The first one was to stop TxDOT from spending any more of our taxpayer money on a propaganda campaign to promote toll roads. They called it the “Keep Texas Moving” campaign. Coupled with that, there are also other allegations in the lawsuit related to the illegal lobbying they’ve been doing. And we called them on it before, hiring outside lobbyists to talk to the legislature. Well, they stopped doing that, but now they are hiring inside lobbyists. The law on this is very clear: they are absolutely not supposed to lobby with taxpayer money, but they’re doing it anyway, in spite of our lawsuits.

Both the House and Senate have called for interim investigations into TxDOT’s use of our money in this way, but they seem tone-deaf, even with these investigations and our lawsuits. We’ve even found evidence of criminal wrongdoing, and we filed complaints with the district attorney’s office and handed over all our documents, everything included in the suit, and yet there is still no grand jury. There are still no full investigation of TxDOT.

Short of our lawsuits, I’m not sure anyone in government would even care what is happening at TxDOT, but with the help of the media, we are shining a light on something that is very wrong. It is a horrible misuse of taxpayer money, and we will continue to shine light on it until the taxpayers get justice and relief. What all this boils down to is a global political elite that wants to stuff their coffers with more and more tax money every year.

ICONOCLAST: Now that you mention it, at the TURF event in Austin there was a lot of talk about the alleged plans for a North American Union and NAFTA superhighway network, with the Trans-Texas Corridor being the southern leg of that project. Is that something you believe to be an impending reality?

HALL: Absolutely. Our mission statement on the Internet ties the Trans-Texas Corridor to the NAFTA superhighway. There is a group called the North American SuperCorridor Coalition, NASCO. They published a map on the Internet many years ago showing a highway network spanning from Canada to Mexico. Since our group and others have formed to oppose this, they’ve taken it down. It shows this massive network of trade corridors they’re forming into a system of superhighways across North America.

[Author’s note: At the NASCO Web site, a document entitled “NASCO – MYTH vs. FACT” goes to great length to distance NASCO from the Trans-Texas Corridor, claiming: “The Trans-Texas Corridor is an initiative launched by Texas Governor Rick Perry and developed by the Texas Department of Transportation to attempt to solve the critical, long-range transportation problems projected for the State of Texas over the next 20 to 30 years. NASCO supports the TTC-35 section (parallel to Interstate 35) of the proposed TTC System because it is directly related to, and will benefit, the existing I-35, NASCO Corridor. We have no authority over this initiative and know of no plans to extend it to other states. Any decision to expand the TTC beyond the State of Texas would be made by that state’s Department of Transportation.”

NASCO also takes pains to disavow any conspiracy as to the placement and removal of its trade corridors map, stating the image was originally intended for marketing purposes only. The group also disavows any support for or discussions of a North American Union.]

ICONOCLAST: So, when the television political pundits accuse activists and others in the world of politics of being conspiracy theorists for believing these free trade corridors and superhighways is the foundation for a union between Canada, the United States and Mexico, they are being disingenuous in your eyes?

HALL: Absolutely. I point to the documentation from Congress. Additionally, the Federal Highway Administration and the U.S. Department of Transportation have labeled them different things. We call it the NAFTA superhighway because we know it is about NAFTA-enabled trade. But, for instance, I-59 is known as corridor 18 and 20 by Congress. The USDoT put out a press release last fall that actually designated not just I-69 but other corridors — I-5 throughout California and Interstate 70 and some other roads — to become privatized, tolled trade corridors. So, the DoT and the Federal Highway administration and groups like NASCO are all over this.

They want these corridor routes. They’ve already designated them, some of them decades ago, and one way or another, they don’t care what the people want. They’re going to get their policies rammed through. One of they ways they can do it is to discredit the opposition by saying we’re a bunch of conspiracy nuts.

Even they call them things like “Corridors of the Future” and “Priority Corridors.” This is about international trade. In fact we had TxDOT panelists admitting at the I-69 public hearing that we have a huge influx of foreign trade coming in through Texas into the rest of the country, and we have to make way for all these goods. I mean, they admitted the Trans-Texas Corridor and these other corridors are all about trade, freight, and shipping goods internationally.

But we can stop this tide if we kill the toll roads here in Texas. I absolutely believe that.

ICONOCLAST: What can the average person do to help your cause?

HALL: Go to our Web site, sign up for our e-mail list, and when we put out the call to organize for an event, do so! Get your friends, family, neighbors, or whoever. This will affect everyone, including those who aren’t even born yet. We need people to join our taxpayer revolt and do whatever they can to grow our movement.

ICONOCLAST: Thank you for taking the time to speak with us.

Gas price reaches $4 a gallon

Link to article here.

We are now in uncharted territory with the price of gas hitting historic highs, even higher than the 1980 oil embargo. There is no rational argument to be made in favor of toll roads in these economic conditions, much less taking out a second mortgage on our existing freeway system by converting it to network of toll roads simply as a tax-grabbing cash cow for government and road builders.

Gas price record reaches $4 a gallon
AAA’s daily survey tops the milestone for the first time after a 1.7-cent rise. Lundberg survey nears $4 as well.
By Mark M. Meinero and Ben Rooney, CNNMoney.com staff writers
June 8, 2008
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) — Gasoline rose to a milestone mark Sunday as the national average compiled by motorist group AAA reached $4 a gallon for the first time.

In a second survey, the average price came within 0.2 cent of $4 a gallon in the Lundberg Survey, which showed a 20-cent rise in the past three weeks to a new record.

The national average for regular unleaded rose 1.7 cents to $4.005, according the daily measure on the AAA’s Web site. That surpassed the previous record of $3.989 set Thursday.

The milestone was expected after a surge in crude oil prices added more than $16 to a barrel of oil over the last 2 trading days. Crude settled at a record $138.54 a barrel Friday, up by $10.75, after setting an all-time intraday high of $139.12.

The $10.75 gain was the biggest one-day advance in dollar value ever, nearly doubling the previous mark of $5.49 set Thursday. Weakness in the dollar, geopolitical concerns and an analyst’s prediction of $150-a-barrel oil by July 4 helped spur Friday’s advance.

In a statement Friday, AAA urged gasoline station owners not to overreact to the single-day oil spike.

“Consumers should not be overcharged for gasoline simply because the oil markets reacted so strongly to today’s news,” AAA said.

Big jump felt across the nation

So far this year, crude prices have increased more than 40%.

The average price is $4 a gallon or more in 14 states and the District of Columbia, according to the survey. California pays the most for gasoline, averaging $4.436, with Alaska and Connecticut both at $4.296. Other states above $4 are Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maine, Michigan, Nevada, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington and West Virginia.

Missouri has the lowest average price at $3.802, followed by South Carolina at $3.809.

Gas prices have risen more than 10% from $3.671 a month ago and are nearly 29% higher than the $3.105 average a year ago, according to the AAA figures.

Gasoline prices in the survey have risen for 31 of the past 33 days, setting records on 29 of those days.

The price of diesel fuel, used by truckers hauling goods across the country, rose 0.8 cent to $4.762 a gallon. That’s 3 cents below the all-time high set May 30.

On its Web site, AAA says the information is gathered by Oil Price Information Service based on credit card swipes at 85,000 gasoline stations across the nation.

‘Essentially $4 a gallon’

In the Lundberg Survey, the average price of gasoline jumped up another 20 cents a gallon in the past three weeks to a record-breaking $3.99 a gallon for self-serve regular.

The survey showed that the average price at gas stations around the nation was just a fraction of a cent under $4 a gallon, said survey publisher Trilby Lundberg.

“We got an average price of $3.9985,” said Lundberg. “This is essentially $4 a gallon. And unfortunately all indications are showing that this number is going to grow.”

The Lundberg survey tallies prices at thousands of gas stations across the country. The latest survey was conducted from May 16 until June 6.

The main reason for the price hike was record highs in crude oil prices, Lundberg said.

The area with the highest average gas prices was Stockton, Calif., which posted $4.41 per gallon. The area with the cheapest gas was Wichita, Kan., which posted an average price of $3.65 per gallon.

Average prices in other areas included: Denver, $3.85; Houston, $3.82; Baltimore, $3.93; Detroit, $3.95, Atlanta, $3.99; Seattle, $4.22; and Hartford, Conn., $4.23

Prices put a brake on driving

Higher gas prices have prompted a growing number of Americans to modify their driving habits.

A recent study by the Department of Transportation showed that the number of drivers on the road in March fell 4.3% versus the previous year. That was the first time March travel on public roads fell in nearly 30 years.

In addition to driving less, many consumers are shifting away from large, low mileage vehicles toward smaller vehicles that consume less gas.

Falling demand for gas-guzzlers has hit some of the nation’s largest automakers hard. General Motors announced plans last week to shut four truck and SUV plants and said it would ramp up producing more fuel-efficient cars. Ford also recently said it would trim production of large trucks and roll out more small cars and crossovers.

But carmakers aren’t the only ones hurt by soaring gas prices. The airline industry, which was ailing even before gas prices spiked, has been fraught with near-bankruptcies, drastic cost cutting efforts and mass groundings of aircraft.

Last week, Continental Airlines said it is eliminating about 3,000 jobs and grounding 67 mainline aircraft to cope with the rising cost of fuel. Other airlines have hiked fuel surcharges to fares and added fees to once-free benefits, such as food and checked baggage.

–CNN Wires contributed to this story To top of page

First neighborhood street to be converted to toll road in Dallas

Link to article here.

If this comes to fruition, Mockingbird lane, a public surface street open as a non-toll, already built and paid for neighborhood street, will be converted to a toll road to keep the “rif-raf” out of a wealthy community. Can you say, economic discrimination and wrong-headed public policy? This says it all: “..charging tolls on a road discourages some drivers from using it, leaving a less-crowded road for those willing to pay.”

Highland Park considers plan to make Dallas drivers pay to use stretch of Mockingbird
Thursday, June 5, 2008
By IAN McCANN and MICHAEL A. LINDENBERGER / The Dallas Morning News
Highland Park’s solution to unclogging traffic congestion on Mockingbird Lane: Make Dallas drivers pay for it.

Since most of the 18,000 drivers on the road each day cut through the town, officials are exploring a proposal to toll the road. Most local drivers would not be charged.

A plan is far from developed, but if it comes to pass, transportation experts say the stretch of Mockingbird between Hillcrest Avenue and Dallas North Tollway could become the first tolled surface street in the country.

The concept, known as congestion pricing, was among dozens of ideas in an application last year in which Dallas Area Rapid Transit led a team of North Texas officials seeking part of a $1 billion federal grant program. It was aimed at finding innovative fixes for traffic-clogged streets in big cities.

The proposal did not win, but Highland Park town engineer Meran Dadgostar said he believes the Mockingbird idea merits consideration.

“Mockingbird was a thoroughfare that would be a good candidate,” he said. “The idea is still a good one.”

Mr. Dadgostar plans to brief the Town Council later this year on congestion pricing before the town will move ahead with further study. But first, officials must address a litany of questions: Is there public support? Can Highland Park legally charge tolls? How much would drivers pay, and how would revenues be used? Who would run the program?

Studying those issues was exactly what local officials had in mind when they included the proposal in the grant application, said Christopher Poe, an assistant director of the Texas Transportation Institute.

The grant would have paid for a detailed report that would have also addressed pricing policy, operations and enforcement.

“There was definitely the recognition that any potential project would have to be thoroughly vetted through the public and political process,” Mr. Poe said.

History of tension

The tolling idea is not the first time talked-about changes to Mockingbird Lane have stoked tensions between Highland Park residents and the many non-resident drivers who rely on the road.

Highland Park’s opposition to widening the road, some have said, was an attempt to keep out non-residents. The current project, a multimillion dollar reconstruction of the road, will leave it generally narrower.

Highland Park Mayor Bill Seay said that while he is unfamiliar with congestion pricing, he would be open to investigating it for Mockingbird. But he acknowledged potential problems.

“I’m sensitive to the fact that the town has been seen as being selfish with the use of that road,” he said.

Dallas City Council member Linda Koop, a member of the Regional Transportation Council, said Mockingbird is seen as a key road in the region’s fight to handle traffic, not just a residential street. Highland Park planners would have to be careful that their efforts don’t lead to heavier traffic on crowded streets nearby.

Mockingbird’s value has been clear since late September, as construction work has sent the 18,000-plus drivers a day looking for detours.

Initially, drivers streamed down Beverly Drive, but added stop signs and tough enforcement have spread traffic to Lovers Lane and other nearby thoroughfares. Mockingbird is expected to reopen by the end of the year.

‘Neighborhood street’

Despite the traffic it carries, many Highland Park residents see Mockingbird as a residential street. In fact, resident Don Chase said, a congested Mockingbird may discourage people from driving on it.

“I love looking out on a Friday afternoon and seeing those cars stacked up in front of my house,” he said. “Drivers will go for the path of least resistance. We’re not using their neighborhood street, so why should they use ours?”

Mr. Chase says he doesn’t think the plan is viable. But transportation experts say congestion pricing has been tested and proven elsewhere.

“This idea works, and it works anywhere there is a capacity problem and the need to smooth traffic flows,” said Tyler Duvall, a top U.S. Department of Transportation official and one of the Bush administration’s leading voices on congestion pricing and other new approaches.

Mr. Duvall said all the finalists for the $1 billion in grant money had plans for some form of congestion pricing or similar approaches. The Mockingbird Lane proposal was part of what made the North Texas application stand out, he said.

One of the grant recipients was San Francisco, which proposed, but later stepped back from, tolling a city street leading to the Golden Gate Bridge. While that proposal was designed to produce revenue, the Mockingbird idea would instead use fluctuating pricing to manage traffic, Mr. Duvall said.

Other tolling ideas

Other tolling ideas that were in the North Texas application will probably go forward without the grant money.

DART, for instance, plans to begin converting some of its carpool lanes to managed lanes sometime later this year. Eventually those tolls would fluctuate according to how congested their adjacent roads are.

Mr. Dadgostar, the Highland Park engineer, said he’d like to refine the Mockingbird proposal as much as possible before taking it to the council for discussion. He said the program could:

•Use cameras or other technology on each end of Mockingbird in the town.

•Charge drivers detected by each scanner within a limited amount of time – those using Mockingbird as a through route.

•Discourage drivers from using parallel residential streets through strict traffic enforcement.

Mr. Dadgostar said most traffic on Mockingbird is going through the town but that he didn’t have detailed data. While many people would choose another route instead of paying a toll, roads such as Northwest Highway, which is north of the town, are better designed to handle large amounts of traffic, he said.

“This is to get drivers to change their habits,” Mr. Dadgostar said. “We’re telling people that there are other routes out there. You pay for things that are worth paying for.”

imccann@dallasnews.com;

mlindenberger@dallasnews.com

What’s congestion pricing?

Congestion pricing is a way to use tolls to regulate traffic on crowded roads. The pricing can take several forms, from a flat fee to a changing rate on a so-called managed lane.

THE PROBLEM – AND SOLUTION: In a growing area, when more roads or lanes are built, it seems that more cars drive there. Congestion pricing uses the principles of supply and demand, applying a charge to drivers at certain times, like peak hours, to prevent traffic jams.

WHY IT WORKS: Fundamentally, charging tolls on a road discourages some drivers from using it, leaving a less-crowded road for those willing to pay. Since road demand varies throughout the day, the tolls needed to influence driver choice can vary as well.

Allard: Texans need to demand more of TxDOT

Link to article here.

Our good friend Ken Allard comes after TxDOT once again with a perfect blend of fact and candor to conclude we need fundamental change at TxDOT.

Ken Allard: Texans must demand more from TxDOT, politicians and themselves
San Antonio Express-News
06/04/2008
Hotly debated public policy questions are rarely settled so decisively, so cleanly, so unanswerably. But Tuesday’s Sunset Commission Report on the Texas Department of Transportation read like an indictment.

Its overall finding: the agency is “out of control” and desperately needs new leadership. TxDOT apologists must have felt as though they had been presented with DNA evidence that Dad had never married Mom: because even the agency’s most strident critics turned out to have understated their case.

There was, of course, the small matter of the billion dollars mislaid by TxDOT, as well its nasty habit of spending public monies to advocate pet projects like the Trans-Texas Corridor, justifiably despised by many citizens. But the report also found TxDOT’s strategic planning is “disjointed;” its project selection not “understandable or transparent.” Even in the information age, agency planning is so chaotic that there is only limited public access to “objective and reliable information about the state’s transportation system.” Bottom line: TxDOT is simply not trusted by Texans or the people we elect to the Legislature.

Gov. Rick Perry must have anticipated the stinging rebuke. On Monday, he suddenly left for Europe, there to boast about Texas business and to participate in the annual D-Day commemoration. (Hint: the Germans lost there because, among other things, we bombed their transportation networks into oblivion.)

Back home, where each day roughly 1,200 new Texans join the hordes already jamming state roads, bad planning is building toward gridlock levels usually produced by war or natural disaster. While we may need something like TxDOT, what would a more effective agency look like? Because the Sunset Commission report marks only the start of that larger debate, there are some basic questions about the future that Texans should begin considering carefully:

Appointed or elected? Who is in charge and who put them there are basic questions at TxDOT or anywhere else. Leaders naturally owe their first loyalty to whoever they feel is most responsible for selecting them, whether governor, legislature or the electorate. So whose loyalty should govern the decisions TxDOT commissioners typically make? For example, do you think the present incumbent, a thirty-something whose sole qualifications are her ties to the governor, could win statewide election to the office? (I don’t either.)

One or Many? Travel here more than five minutes and you become aware that Texas is a subcontinent in its own right, with every conceivable kind of terrain and transportation challenge. We are rural and urban; coastal marsh and upland desert; piney woods and endless prairie. So why do we think a Soviet-style central planning bureau like TxDOT is the appropriate model for such a diverse and often fractious state? There have been ample precedents here for local planning authorities. Why not empower them with more decentralized planning and execution responsibilities, maybe even electing local transportation leaders as well?

Strategy or Tactics? Straighten out the structure and you also enable more precise divisions of labor. Elected local authorities are far better able to decide small but urgent issues, like building a ramp to the Dominion versus one connecting Loop 1604 with U.S. Highway 281. A reformed TxDOT could then focus more effectively on the overall system, including vital strategic questions like road versus rail or even the injection of new technologies like high-speed, magnetic-levitation trains. Eventually we might even engineer roadways that didn’t look as though they had been designed by Martian bureaucrats.

Who pays and how? Like it or not, we need more and better roads as well as the means to pay for them. Texans, tolls and taxes have never gone well together, but even less so with gas climbing steadily toward $5 a gallon. So how do we raise the money, especially with fewer prospects for bailouts from Washington? Creative financing is one thing, but public expenditures always mean debt or taxes.

So let’s begin by demanding better accountability from our public servants and our political leaders.

But most of all, from ourselves.

Retired Col. Ken Allard is an executive-in-residence at UTSA.

Guerra: TxDOT dysfunctional, needs replacing

Link to article here.

Mr. Guerra nails TxDOT to the wall in his very truthful and accurate assessment of what’s gone wrong at TxDOT. One of my favorite lines: “TxDOT — which spends $8 billion annually — is not only dysfunctional, it is clearly hell-bent on pushing an agenda that few outside of the road-construction industry agree with.” Amen, Mr. Guerra!

Carlos Guerra: TxDOT’s problems warrant not just a fix, but replacement
Express-News
06/06/2008
Outside its own, its contractors’ and Gov. Rick Perry’s offices, the Texas Department of Transportation doesn’t exactly have a bunch of fans.

That was apparent earlier this week when cheers erupted statewide after the Texas Sunset Advisory Commission released its blistering 159-page staff report on the agency.

Created by the Legislature in 1977, the Sunset Commission reviews each of the state’s 150 agencies every 12 years, looking for waste, inefficiency and duplication.

The commission’s 12 members often tweak staff recommendations, then fire them to the Legislature before the agencies are reauthorized.

If an agency is not reauthorized, it dies. This seldom happens, but Sunset recommendations have led to changes, even a few important ones.

One big reason TxDOT’s evaluation got so much ink and air time is that it is unusually harsh and extensive. But it also confronts incredibly contentious Texas issues: TxDOT’s relentless drive to build toll roads, privatize state roads and build the Trans-Texas Corridor that will cut through thousands of acres of private property.

TxDOT’s ham-handed actions have created a broad and deep-seated distrust of the agency, so it wasn’t surprising to read in the staff report’s second paragraph: “Sunset staff found that this … distrust permeated most of TxDOT’s actions and determined that it could not be an effective state transportation agency if trust and confidence were not restored.”

And if that isn’t clear enough, ask the thousands who attended TxDOT’s public hearings on these issues and were treated rudely and then blown off entirely, or the reporters and others who sought public information only to be stonewalled.

TxDOT — which spends $8 billion annually — is not only dysfunctional, it is clearly hell-bent on pushing an agenda that few outside of the road-construction industry agree with.

But the Sunset report also excoriates its secrecy, and disingenuousness, and for how it remains unaccountable, even to the lawmakers who appropriate its budget. It also details management, bookkeeping and policy-development practices that are, at best, questionable.

TxDOT’s projected $86 billion shortfall, for example, was even disputed by the Governor’s Business Council Transportation Task Force before the state auditor faulted its seriously flawed methodology.

And what about that $1.1 billion accounting error that TxDOT kept under wraps for months? Or the instances in which the propriety of expenditures — like spending millions to promote and lobby for the Trans-Texas Corridor — have been seriously questioned?

And some of its practices have also made it difficult, if not impossible, to verify if appropriations are being spent for their intended purposes.

When the Sunset Commission meets in August to review this report in Austin, they can count on drawing a big crowd.

But replacing the five-member, governor-appointed Texas Transportation Commission with a single commissioner — the Sunset staff’s principal recommendation — doesn’t address long-term issues that need attention now.

Lawmakers need to replace this insular agency entirely with one that does not view itself as a self-governing road-building entity that lets private-sector vendors write its policies. In today’s fast-changing world, Texas must deal with transportation more comprehensively by seriously incorporating rail and other public-transit options into its plans.

And if we don’t, our grandchildren will inherit a huge system of largely underused highways that either will be controlled by unaccountable private-sector operators from who knows where, or will have been sold back to the state but their debt will remain unpaid for generations to come.

What kind of future is that?

Letter to Editor highlights unintended consequences of toll projects

Unintended consequences
Letter to the Editor
June 10, 2008
Express News

In a rush to find the “silver bullet” to solve the energy crisis, Congress quickly latched on to two technologies: compact fluorescent bulbs (CFBs) and ethanol. Now that Congress has committed the country, it comes out that both products cause problems.

CFBs, which contain mercury, will contaminate our landfills and will not work with dimmer switches. The wholesale shift to ethanol has led to a worldwide food crisis resulting in civil unrest in places like Haiti, Indonesia and Afghanistan. Members of Congress refer to these outcomes as “unintended consequences.” They can do so truthfully because they never bothered to study the subjects before making these decisions on behalf of the American people.

Now we are seeing the same practice on the state and local level when it comes to toll roads. Despite numerous requests to do so, TxDOT, the Alamo Regional Mobility Authority, the Metropolitan Planning Organization, etc. have refused to perform routine impact studies before committing our region to toll roads. So ultimately when traffic reroutes itself through surrounding neighborhood streets to avoid paying tolls, it will be an unintended consequence.

When businesses close along toll road corridors because tolls have absorbed the discretionary spending dollars of families, it will be another unintended consequence. When toll receipts prove insufficient to pay off the bonds and the bonds become the burden of taxpayers … well, you get the picture.

You would think that before these organizations bind our region to 50-year obligations, they would want to check these things out. Of course, the members of these organizations expect to have moved on long before the chickens come home to roost and expect that voters will forget who got us into this mess.

Marc Smith
San Antonio

Government stops tracking foreign investment in U.S.

Link to article here. As companies race to dig-up new sources of cash in a tight credit market thanks to the mortgage crash, they’re turning to foreign investors, many owned by un-democratic governments. It shouldn’t surprise us that in this climate, the government wants to hide how much of our country is being sold off to the highest foreign bidder after 83% of Americans said they opposed our ports falling under the control of an arm of the Dubai government in 2006. They know this is a threat to our sovereignty and economic independence as a Nation and that voters will naturally hold politicians responsible for such a dereliction of duty. We must restore transparency and accountability and stop selling off America to the highest bidder!

U.S. stops following foreign money trail
Expert says nation’s assets are being sold for billions
By Jerome R. Corsi
World Net Daily
June 09, 2008

NEW YORK – Foreign investment in the United States is on the rise and key U.S. businesses and infrastructures such as roads and airports are being sold to foreign investors. Now comes word from the U.S. Department of Commerce the Bureau of Economic Affairs will stop publishing a key report tracking those foreign dollars.

WND reported earlier on a decision by the Federal Reserve to quit publishing M3 data, a money-supply measure watched closely by economists.

Last month, econometrician John Williams reported on his subscription website, “Shadow Government Statistics,” that the M3 statistic he compiles from available government data shows the growth of M3 at historically high rates last seen in June 1971, two months before President Nixon closed the gold window and instituted wage and price controls.

Charles McMillion, president and chief economist at MBG Information Services in Washington, D.C., also has expressed concern over the recent decision by the Department of Commerce to discontinue publishing foreign investment data and warned that may forecast an unprecedented surge in foreign investment anticipated by the Bush administration.

In the announcement, BEA claimed funding limitations necessitated halting future reports.

The most recent report, released Wednesday, showed direct foreign investment in U.S. businesses reached $276.8 billion in 2007, the second largest amount recorded and the highest since 2000, when new foreign investment outlays peaked at $335.6 billion.

Of the direct foreign investments in the U.S. in 2007, only about 10 percent, approximately $21.9 billion, established new U.S. businesses, while foreign investments to acquire existing U.S. businesses totaled $255.0 billion.

Nearly 37 percent of the foreign investments in 2007 involved European investors, although the BEA noted investments from Asia and the Middle East rose substantially.

McMillion noted in an e-mail that the BEA decision to discontinue publishing foreign investment data comes at a time when public and congressional concerns have increased over the acquisition of U.S. assets by foreign investors

McMillian referenced the recent attempt by “China’s mysterious but closely state-aligned Huawei” to acquire 3Com, a key supplier of Internet security technologies to the U.S. Department of State, in conjunction with Boston-based Bain Capital, a private equity firm founded by Republican 2008 presidential candidate Mitt Romney.

In March, Bain pulled out of the deal after learning that the secretive Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, or CFIUS, organized in the U.S. Treasury Department, planned to block the deal.

In May, during a four-day trip to the Middle East that included Saudi Arabia and Dubai, U.S. Secretary of Treasury Henry Paulson encouraged foreign investment in the United States, arguing the controversy over Dubai Ports in 2006 did not reflect an adverse U.S. attitude toward foreign investment.

“I have met with many leaders from the Middle East who ask if the United States really continues to welcome investment,” Paulson said in a speech to the U.S.-United Arab Emirates Business Council, according to Bloomberg.com. “As we seek to open new markets abroad, America will keep our markets open at home to investment from private firms and from sovereign wealth funds.”

WND previously reported that since the beginning of the year, Dubai and Abu Dhabi, two of the largest United Arab Emirate states, have been in discussions with the U.S. Treasury, offering reassurances that their investments in U.S. banks and security firms would not impose restrictions usually dictated by Islamic law, commonly known as sharia.

WND also has reported sovereign wealth funds in six Persian Gulf countries, including Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar, have now amassed $1.7 trillion, positioning them for attempts to control major banks and securities firms in the United States.

In September 2007, Dubai acquired 19.9 percent of Nasdaq, the second largest stock exchange in the United States.

WND also reported last month the top bid to lease the Pennsylvania Turnpike on a long-term public-private-partnership, or PPP lease, for a bid of $12.8 billion was submitted by Spanish infrastructure management company Abertis Infraestructuras of Barcelona.

TxDOT jet-sets all over state abusing access to State Aircraft

Link to article here.

Just when you’d think things at TxDOT can’t get any worse, a front page story appears telling of their abuse of state airplanes for $130,000 worth of jet-setting across the state on the taxpayers’ dime! At least one of those trips was taken by Transportation Commissioner Ted Houghton who used the planes to illegally lobby in favor of the Trans Texas Corridor TTC-69 project at a workshop they initiated with elected officials (which is against the law) and then lied about sponsoring it.

This event is part of TURF’s evidence against TxDOT in our lawsuit to stop it’s propaganda campaign and illegal lobbying. The other two offenders: Rick Perry and the Attorney General (who is representing TxDOT against the taxpayers in our lawsuit to stop their illegal lobbying and ad campaign) with over $20,000 each in state-funded travel for what can be argued was personal and/or political travel.

Texans for Fiscal Responsibility and Empower Texans, whose Director is quoted in the article, put together this video as a spoof on TxDOT’s luxury airline use at taxpayer expense. Watch it!

Cost, uses of state’s plane fleet targeted
By Peggy Fikac
Express-News Austin Bureau
06/03/2008

AUSTIN — Five years after Texas leaders tried to disband the state’s airplane fleet, officials still call on the service to fly them to meetings, awards ceremonies, funerals and even a neighboring GOP governor’s inauguration.

Officeholders and bureaucrats, including Gov. Rick Perry, say they look at cost and efficiency before deciding whether to use the aircraft, which cost $258.75 to $977.50 per flight hour and are allowed for official state business.

But some question the fleet because bills are often footed by taxpayers and because commercial airfare may look cheaper.

“It sure does raise the eyebrows and make the nose crinkle a bit,” said Michael Quinn Sullivan of Texans for Fiscal Responsibility. “Between two really good Texas-based airlines, there’s any number of options to get from anywhere to anywhere by air pretty quickly.”

Then-Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn and Perry talked up selling the planes during a 2003 budget crunch.

But the Texas Department of Transportation, which oversees the fleet, expects it to log 1,227 more flight hours — for a total of 3,350 or about $2.3 million worth of flying time — in this two-year budget period than the last.

“State agencies have seen the value of our services as an effective business tool,” said TxDOT spokesman Chris Lippincott, noting commercial air travel’s cost “continues to rise, and its reliability continues to deteriorate.”

State taxpayers don’t pay for the trips funded by donations or other sources. Among them: University of Texas football recruiting jaunts, paid by the self-sufficient athletics department; the UT president’s travel; and a trip by Texas A&M basketball coaches and players to the Big 12 media day in Kansas City.

Louisiana trip questioned

But many other trips are paid by the state and may draw closer scrutiny, such as a $3,962 trip by Perry, a staffer and a member of the governor’s security detail to Baton Rouge for the inauguration of Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, a fellow Republican. Perry, who heads the Republican Governors Association, spoke at the prayer breakfast.

“I’d want to know, did he go to (Democratic New Mexico Gov.) Bill Richardson’s inauguration?” asked state Rep. Jim Dunnam of Waco, head of the House Democratic Caucus. “If he didn’t go to Richardson’s, I think it’s pretty apparent this is a partisan political trip. If he’s going to do that, he ought to do it on his own dime. He’s got plenty of money in his campaign. Taxpayers shouldn’t pay for it.”

Perry spokesman Robert Black dismissed the idea that the trip was political, asking, “When was Richardson inaugurated? I have no idea if he (Perry) was even invited.”

“Not only was the governor invited … to participate in Bobby Jindal’s inauguration, I think most Texans recognize that the states of Louisiana and Texas have a unique relationship that has grown out of the natural disasters that happened a few years ago,” Black said, noting efforts led by Perry to help after Hurricane Katrina.

Perry’s office notes that most of his travel, aside from that on state aircraft, is paid by his campaign.

His Baton Rouge trip was among a slew of state-airplane records covering the six months ending in March examined by the San Antonio Express-News.

Among officials using state money to pay for flights and billed more than $20,000 apiece for the time period were Perry ($24,537); Attorney General Greg Abbott and staff ($21,943); TxDOT administration, government and public affairs, and other divisions ($130,568); the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality ($56,560); and Agriculture Commissioner Todd Staples and staff ($50,302).

Commercial cost compared

Destinations used with the fleet included news conferences, public meetings and awards ceremonies. They also included memorial services for Texas Transportation Commission Chairman Ric Williamson and for Kate Marmion, granddaughter of former Gov. Dolph Briscoe, and meetings on the Trans-Texas Corridor by transportation officials.

In choosing a state plane, officials say they consider factors including productive use of time, avoiding the cost and delay of overnight stays, number of people traveling and availability of commercial flights.

Some trips invite comparison to commercial airfares — including Perry’s to Baton Rouge, because an online booking service currently shows roundtrip flights as low as $486 per person ($647 per person for a flight departing in the evening) or totals of $1,458 to $1,941 for three people. Perry spokeswoman Allison Castle noted Perry’s schedule and commercial flight schedules play into such decisions.

Another is a March 7 trip to Houston by Staples and two others at a cost of $2,346. Southwest Airlines’ flight schedule shows three adults could currently travel roundtrip for $257.50 apiece, or a total of $772.50.

Staples spokesman Bryan Black said Staples got to Houston at 7:45 a.m. for a school award presentation and, after a day of events capped by a speech at the International Brangus Breeders Association Banquet and Awards Dinner, left at 9:30 p.m..

That would have been too late to make the last commercial flight. Compounding the time crunch was that Staples was due in Hereford the next day. (He went by state plane, at a cost of $2,659). Bryan Black noted Staples often visits hard-to-reach rural areas but uses commercial flights when he can and often drives. “He wants to make sure that he visits with Texans and listens to what they have to say.”

Three state senators flew state planes during the six-month period examined: Sens. Carlos Uresti, D-San Antonio; Robert Duncan, R-Lubbock; and Kip Averitt, R-Waco. Uresti racked up the largest bill of the three at $13,009 for trips to Marfa, Del Rio, Eagle Pass and Laredo.

“I have the largest senatorial district, geographically, not only in Texas but in the United States — 55,000 square miles,” Uresti said. He said he is “very selective” in using state aircraft but sometimes must make stops in hard-to-reach places.

“There’s no easy way to get to Marfa,” he said. “My constituents in Alpine, in Del Rio, in Fort Stockton — they want their state senator at their town hall meetings. It’s there for that use. I don’t abuse it.”

How small is $18 million?

The state fleet is in addition to airplanes belonging solely to individual agencies, such as the UT and A&M systems and the Department of Public Safety, which may still use the state fleet when their planes are busy.

Sullivan, of Texans for Fiscal Responsibility, said he isn’t suggesting officials are wrong to use a fleet that’s at their disposal, but lawmakers should take a hard look at whether it’s necessary to maintain it.

“There’s certainly the occasional need for someone to be transported in that way,” Sullivan said, citing law enforcement and response to natural disasters. But, he added, “when you find out these various muckety-mucks are jumping on the planes just because it’s easier to do that, that’s not right.”

The fleet, previously under the State Aircraft Pooling Board, was targeted by Strayhorn and Perry in 2003 when the state faced a $10 billion budget shortfall. At the time, Strayhorn said selling the planes and associated property would yield $18.2 million. Perry vetoed the pooling board from the budget, but the fleet was transferred to TxDOT.

Perry spokeswoman Krista Piferrer said Perry “doesn’t really have an opinion one way or another” now about whether the fleet should be maintained.

“His main priority has always been that aircraft are used for state business and are operated on a cost recovery basis.”

Sullivan said $18 million is a small percentage of the state’s $152.5 billion two-year budget, but added, “It’s not a small amount of money. … You take the richest person in Texas, and they notice when $18 million is gone.”