Author: Terri Hall

Texas House to end 80-yr raid of gas taxes

Posted on by

Link to article here.

Texas House to end 80-yr raid of gas taxes
By Terri Hall
May 14, 2014

It’s about time. Speaker Joe Straus announced today that the Texas House will finally introduce a budget next session that will put an end to gas tax diversions. The practice has been a sore spot for taxpayers as the state has increasingly relied on tolling and debt to bail out lawmakers from having to discipline the use of gas tax. Collecting taxes for one purpose then spending it on another defies truth in taxation and transparency.

While this announcement is a welcome step in the right direction, it leaves the impression that all of the gas taxes collected would now go to roads. However, the press release is carefully worded to say all the money in the ‘State Highway Fund’ would go to roads. Twenty-five percent of the gas tax gets diverted to public schools before it hits the State Highway Fund per the Texas Constitution. So one-quarter of the gas tax would still be diverted elsewhere. To change that requires two-thirds of the Texas Legislature to pass a Constitutional Amendment that voters would then have to approve. As long as Democrats draw breath, that would never happen. As long as Republicans draw breath, they’ll never raise the gas tax.

The timing of Straus’ announcement is no accident. Lawmakers passed a Constitutional Amendment last year that comes before the voters this November. Proposition 1 would divert half of the oil and gas severance tax (roughly $1 billion/yr) that currently goes into the state’s Rainy Day Fund to the State Highway Fund. If raiding that highway fund for non-road purposes is still the practice, lawmakers recognize voters are unlikely to approve the measure.

None of the new money could go to toll roads, which is a double tax that’s currently the norm at the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT). None of the state’s proposed toll roads, which number in the hundreds, are toll viable. That means none of them can pay for themselves with just the toll users alone. All require big taxpayer subsidies and/or loan guarantees. So Texans are being double and triple taxed to drive on a single stretch of road, some on lanes they drive on today toll-free.

Despite the protection from toll roads and the requirement that a minimum amount stay in the Rainy Day Fund before the severance tax could go to roads, many tea party groups still oppose the amendment out of principle – the state shouldn’t be using emergency funds to fund a core function of government, roads. So Straus’ pledge comes at an important juncture as lawmakers seek to shore-up support for the amendment.

When the legislature passed the amendment, Rep. George Lavender warned his colleagues that voters would think the road funding problem is solved if they approve the measure. But it won’t, and neither will ending gas tax diversions. TxDOT is short $4 billion a year and ending non-education gas tax diversions and passage of Prop 1 doesn’t even solve half of the problem. Lawmakers still need to look at other options to shore-up the structural road funding shortfall.

What shortfall? The state collects a 20-cent per gallon tax on gasoline that’s remained unchanged since 1991. It doesn’t adjust for inflation so we’re, in essence, trying to build today’s roads with a 20-year-old revenue stream. On top of that, much of our existing road money is being habitually raided for non-road purposes, like the gas tax diversions.

The low hanging fruit is to stop using road money (paid for by motorists) for transit, rail, and bike paths that motorists don’t use. That goes for both federal and state gas tax. The Texas Mobility Fund is being used to build street cars, toll roads, and dredge our ports, when it should be used to fix our freeways and keep them toll-free. The next step to truth in taxation is to dedicate the vehicle sales tax ($3.3 billion/yr) to roads, which is currently being dumped into general revenue. Together, by simply dedicating all the current road taxes we already pay to roads, lawmakers can fix the structural road funding shortfall without raising taxes.

Straus should be commended for taking an important bold step in ending an 80-year practice of raiding road funds. But there’s still a long way to go to ensure adequate funds are appropriated to build and maintain our highways in a growing state.

Poll Shows Overwhelming Opposition To Tolling

Posted on by

Link to article here.

Poll Shows Overwhelming Opposition To Tolling
Two out of three reject the administration plan to toll existing interstate freeway lanes in a new Rasmussen Reports poll.
TheNewspaper.com
May 8, 2014

In a nationwide survey of American adults, only 22 percent expressed support for the administration’s latest push to allow states to convert existing freeway into toll roads. Rasmussen Reports released the findings Wednesday in the wake of the Transportation Department’s presentation of its funding blueprint to Congress.

“A proposal has been made to allow states to put tolls on Interstate highways to help pay for highway and other infrastructure repairs,” the pollsters explained to a thousand survey participants. “Do you favor or oppose putting tolls on Interstate highways for infrastructure maintenance?”

Nearly two-thirds said they opposed the idea. Resistance was nearly universal across demographic categories, with a solid majority of young and old, black and white, married and unmarried expressing opposition to tolls. Republican distaste for tolling was highest at 74 percent compared to 54 percent of Democrats. The only group where opposition to “Lexus lanes” softened was the over $200,000 income bracket, where 35 percent were against the idea.

Opposition to tolls did not appear to be rooted in financial concerns. The survey found only about a third of respondents said tolls in their area were too high, and 67 percent said they would find a way to route around the tolls. Rasmussen speculates that the primary reason the public rejects tolling is that 68 percent lacked confidence that interstate tolling funds would actually be used to repair roads and bridges.

Rasmussen is an independent survey firm that does not conduct commissioned polls seeking a certain outcome. State and federal transportation departments, on the other hand, have invested millions in taxpayer funds to support tolling efforts. In a 2007 report, the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) emphasized the need to “educate” the public to arrive at a positive result in polling.

“In communicating about tolling, presenting a unified message to the public is necessary for public understanding and support of tolling programs,” the report explained. “Confusion over the need for tolls, the use of toll revenues, or the options available to travelers will undermine the credibility of tolling programs and increase public resistance.”

WSDOT data show that tolling imposes 22 percent overhead costs on all transactions, compared to the 0.88 percent cost of collecting the gasoline tax (view report).

281 design flaw

Posted on by

281 design flaw: Can’t get on the toll road even if you wanted to
By Terri Hall
Examiner.com
April 15, 2014

The Alamo Regional Mobility Authority (or RMA) and its army of consultants recently unveiled its new design to purportedly ‘fix’ congestion on Highway 281 outside Loop 1604. The plan morphed from a completed, streamlined expressway design (upgrading the corridor adding two new lanes, needed overpasses, and access roads) to a hybrid toll-transit-HOV mix with fewer non-toll highway lanes than we have today — non-toll lanes that cease at Stone Oak Parkway.

Let’s breakdown what they’re planning to build and then tackle the flaws in the design. The improvements to Hwy 281 begin at Loop 1604 heading north to the Bexar County line (approximately 7.8 miles). Today there are six non-toll highway lanes (three in each direction) to Evans Road, where it goes down to five lanes. Then the existing freeway shrinks to four lanes (two lanes each direction) at Stone Oak Parkway where it continues to the county line and beyond. Today, Hwy 281 does not have access or frontage roads. It’s a divided highway with stop lights at the crossovers. The posted speed limit is 60 MPH.

The RMA’s tollway design shrinks the non-toll highway lanes from six down to four (from Loop 1604 to Stone Oak Pkwy.). That means two existing freeway lanes will be converted to toll ‘managed’ lanes, which is a double tax. The RMA counts the new access roads as the replacement for the non-toll capacity. At Stone Oak Pkwy., all the non-toll freeway lanes end and Hwy 281 becomes a six lane tollway. The only non-toll option north of Stone Oak Pkwy. will be access/frontage roads with slower speed limits and permanent stop lights.

Here’s just a taste of the 281 troubles:

1) Drivers cannot access the toll lanes from the 1604 interchange ramps
Anyone heading north on Hwy 281 from Loop 1604 will not be able to access the toll lanes even if they wanted to. The majority of the traffic in the 281 corridor is between Loop 1604 and Stone Oak Pkwy. Approximately 90,000 cars a day. If none of those travelers can access the toll lanes, who is this project helping? The volume of traffic diminishes after Stone Oak Pkwy. So all local traffic (those needing to exit somewhere between Loop 1604 and Stone Oak Parkwy.) will be scrunched into four non-toll lanes (two each direction) when today there are six (three each direction). Even with the new overpasses, there will be significant congestion on the non-toll lanes.

Now let’s travel in reverse. Anyone heading south on 281 cannot enter or exit the toll lanes between Stone Oak Pkwy. and Loop 1604. The only way to access the new northern interchange ramps onto Loop 1604 will be from the non-toll lanes. So, once again, all the traffic needing to travel on Loop 1604 will be squeezed into the four non-toll lanes when today there are six. A significant number of travelers need to take Loop 1604 and do not continue heading south on 281 toward downtown. Again, who is this project helping? Not those who need to get on Loop 1604. Not local traffic, nor local businesses. It’s designing permanent congestion in the corridor.

Indeed, the RMA admitted the toll lanes are geared toward those traveling in from outside the county – in other words, Comal County. However, the number of vehicles coming from Comal County are dwarfed by the numbers traveling within Bexar County, particularly in the section from Loop 1604 to Stone Oak Pkwy. Yet those travelers will have fewer non-toll freeway lanes than they have today and will not be able to access the toll lanes even if they wanted to. So arguably, the proposed tollway will make congestion in the corridor worse, not better.

2) Texas-sized bottleneck at Stone Oak Pkwy.
What the RMA proposes actually exacerbates the bottleneck at Stone Oak. The bottleneck happens at Stone Oak when the four non-toll freeway lanes end and all highway lanes north of Stone Oak become toll lanes, so anyone who cannot afford the toll lanes will have to exit en masse at Stone Oak. Since all the local neighborhoods south of Stone Oak cannot access the toll lanes even if they wanted to, it, too, will cause congestion on the four remaining non-toll main lanes (two each direction). The few who would be most likely to take the toll lanes all the way up to the county line (Comal County residents) will not be significant enough to diminish the congestion south of Stone Oak. The non-toll lanes will remain backed up as they are today due to the reduced capacity.

The options originally studied were 1) a complete expressway with overpasses and access roads (either all highway lanes tolled or all highway lanes non-tolled) or 2) an elevated tolled expressway. Now it’s a hybrid toll mess (two highway lanes tolled and four non-toll freeway lanes next to it for 3 miles, then eventually all six highway lanes become tolled for 4 miles). How it would ultimately be financed would not determine the final alternative, we were told. That’s no longer the case. There’s no complete non-toll option advancing for final approval by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). It’s either the hybrid tollway or no build. The RMA misled everyone.

3) Tolls will be as high as 50 cents a mile
The published toll rate range is 17 cents a mile up to 50 cents a mile, which is $2,000 in added toll taxes per commuter (and that’s if you only take one roundtrip 5 days a week). The toll rate isn’t even based on the cost of the project and retiring the debt, it’s called ‘congestion pricing’ that goes up and down with the level of congestion. Big daddy government will track every mile you drive with an electronic toll tag or you’ll pay 33-50% more to be billed by mail. If you dispute any of the charges or fail to pay, the RMA can block your car registration. If you fail to appear in court for alleged toll violations, a warrant for your arrest can be issued. The RMA has already stated on the record that it plans to charge the tolls in perpetuity. The tolls will NEVER come off 281 once they tap into this new revenue stream.

4) Via gets its own exclusive flyover ramp
The plan also includes an extravagant, exclusive Via transit lane and direct connect ramp ($56 million is the estimate available) to its planned Park-N-Ride facility at the corner of Stone Oak Pkwy. and Hwy 281. The ramp will be elevated above the roadway and overpasses. It’s higher than a double deck, estimated to be up to 75 feet in the air (as tall as the southern direct connect interchange ramps at 1604). The Via exclusive transit lane and ramp can only be accessed in two places – just north of Evans Road near the mega HEB and just north of Stone Oak Pkwy. The lanes dump into the toll lanes in the center of 281 so the transit riders needing to travel to Loop 1604 can’t take the transit lanes. It’s designed for travelers who are headed south of Loop 1604 on Hwy 281 with very limited stops until downtown.

Anyone who has to travel to Loop 1604 cannot exit the Park-N-Ride using the ramp, those travelers are dumped onto Stone Oak Pkwy. Any buses needing to get to 1604 will be forced to take Stone Oak Pkwy. I wonder how Stone Oak residents will like being jammed behind empty buses on an already congested Stone Oak Parkway? Buses do get a free ride on the toll lanes, though access is so limited to local traffic that it’s hard to imagine who will use them.

An estimated 1% of travelers use transit. Since the transit lane doesn’t even connect to 1604, it doesn’t connect to all the major destinations and job centers along 1604 and I-10 (like USAA and the Medical Center), so it limits the universe of riders exclusively to north-south traffic only. Much of the 281 traffic heading south peels off to 1604. Most people are not headed all the way downtown.

Knowing that the toll road isn’t remotely financially viable (can’t pay for itself with just the toll payers), the RMA wants to use the taxpayers as their bailout plan and loan guarantor by seeking a State Infrastructure Bank loan or a federal TIFIA loan rather than bonds backed exclusively by tolls (that taxpayers aren’t responsible for repaying).

5) Don’t fall for the ‘HOV rides free’
In order to get that free ride, you have to be a ‘registered’ carpool vehicle with an active TollTag account (which costs you money to keep open), and it usually requires 3 or more people to be in your car (based on the policies we’ve seen in all other Texas cities). So just hopping into the HOV/toll lane to take relatives to the airport or to go to lunch with colleagues won’t count as a qualified HOV ‘free ride.’ Moms in minivans shuttling kids to soccer practice also won’t qualify unless you register in advance and meet the qualifications as a ‘registered, declared’ carpool vehicle.

6) Super-overpass at Wilderness Oak and Overlook Parkway
To add to the bizarre design of this tollway, the RMA is going to do a continuous mega overpass over Wilderness Oak all the way to Overlook Parkway. Anytime a roadway goes elevated, the noise and dirt levels explode exponentially. So the adjacent neighborhoods will experience big boosts in road noise and dirt by the extended, elevated double overpass. Those with respiratory problems like asthma, beware!

Final meeting May 8
This hybrid tollway is too complex, too inaccessible, poorly conceived, and a Texas-sized bad deal for taxpayers that won’t solve the traffic mess out there. If any of these red flags concern you, then mark your calendar. Your last chance to weigh-in before the RMA sends the environmental study off to the feds for approval is at its 281 Open House on May 8 at Summit Christian Center off Marshall Road from 5:30 PM – 7:00 PM. Come see it for yourself and be sure to get your comments on the record. The expressway option should be all non-toll, period. This complicated, impractical tollway needs to be off the table.

Conflicts of interest

Posted on by

IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Terri Hall, Director, Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom and Texans for Toll-free Highways
Phone: (210) 275-0640

Krier’s conflicts of interest should keep him out of District 9 seat
Chairs board of Cintra’s SH 130 tollway

(San Antonio, TX – Monday, April 28, 2014) With Wendy Davis on the hot seat for conflicts of interest representing the North Texas Tollway Authority while a sitting senator on the Senate Transportation Committee, San Antonio voters need to be aware of similar conflicts brewing in their own backyard before they head to the polls. When deciding who should fill the San Antonio City Council District 9 seat vacated by Elisa Chan, they need to know about some serious red flags with Joe Krier. Krier worked for the law firm Bracewell & Giuliani, which happens to be Spanish toll road mega giant, Cintra’s, U.S. law firm. Krier also serves as Chairman of the Board for Cintra’s SH 130 tollway.

Both of these positions create major conflicts of interest for Krier as San Antonio faces imminent toll projects all over the north side on US 281, Loop 1604, I-10 and 1-35 (and eventually the entire city). If that’s not enough, Krier also served as Chair of the San Antonio Mobility Coalition (or SAMCo), the largest transportation lobby group in the Alamo city which lobbies for toll roads and multi-modal transportation (think street cars/light rail) as well as the President of the Greater Chamber of Commerce. His coziness with big business interests like Cintra and Zachry that want to takeover control of our public highways in long-term contracts designed to extract the highest possible tolls (up to 95 cents a mile in DFW), subordinates the taxpayers and the public interest to special interests.

Cintra trying to buy legislative seat, too?
Krier’s race isn’t the only one where Cintra would benefit. In the Texas House District 108 run-off in Dallas to replace Dan Branch (in a run-off himself for Attorney General), Morgan Meyer also works for Bracewell & Giuliani, hence Cintra. Cintra controls and operates two major toll facilities in existing corridors on I-820 (North Tarrant Express) and I-635 (LBJ, read about Bracewell & Giuliani’s work for Cintra on this project here).

So it looks like Cintra is attempting to buy more than just local city council races, it’s seeking to install its own people in the Texas legislature, too. As if all its lobbyists don’t garner enough influence in Austin, now they want to directly vote on whether certain Texas roadways are approved for such privatization deals, known as public private partnerships.

Loop 1604 in San Antonio is slated to be privatized. Remember, toll rates on such sweetheart deals run as high as 95 cents a mile. The Alamo Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (or MPO) is comprised of local elected officials, four of which are city councilmembers. Krier could end up on the MPO (taxpayers don’t get to decide who sits on the MPO) and cast direct votes on whether or not our highways become toll roads and whether or not these special interests get a hold of them for a half century at a time.

Many in the community already know Krier isn’t looking out for them. At a high profile public hearing on 281 several years back, Krier was loudly booed and shouted down for speaking in favor of tolling 281 despite public opposition as SAMCo’s emissary. Krier also received a poor reception in the Texas legislature where he testified regularly in favor of toll roads and handing our public roads over to special interests.

Having it both ways
Krier recognized the low-hanging fruit of the detested streetcar proclaiming to be against it, yet he testified in favor of multi-modal transportation many times as Chair of SAMCO and the Chamber. Perhaps he did so to distract from his long-standing love affair with an equally detested public policy — toll roads.

District 9 voters need to be aware of a crony capitalist like Joe Krier. There are others seeking this council seat with several new faces: Bert Cecconi, Donald Oroian and Corey Clark. However, Weston Martinez is the most familiar to voters with some name ID and substantial grassroots support. Martinez is also reliably anti-toll, fighting toll roads long before he ran for office. Early voting starts Monday, April 28 and runs through May 6. Election day is May 10. Be sure you vote in this important race. Meanwhile, the primary run-off election for that District 108 race with another Cintra employee, Morgan Meyer, is May 27. Chart Wescott is the anti-toll candidate in that race.

If you’re tired of politicians denying us a public vote on these multi-billion dollar toll tax schemes,  go to www.LetSAVote.com to sign the petition to put toll roads to a public vote.

# # #

TTH opposes Obama proposal

Posted on by

IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Terri Hall, Director, Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom and Texans for Toll-free Highways
Phone: (210) 275-0640

TURF & Texans for Toll-free Highways opposes Obama proposal to lift ban on tolling existing interstates

(San Antonio, TX – April 30, 2014) It’s official. Yesterday, the Obama administration announced the president’s support of lifting the ban on tolling existing interstates. But the two leading grassroots organizations fighting for toll-free highways in Texas, Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom (TURF) and Texans for Toll-free Highways (TTH), vehemently oppose such a proposition.

“Slapping tolls on existing toll-free highways is highway robbery and double taxation. We’ve already paid for these roads, and now Obama wants us to pay for them again by charging us a toll for every mile we drive on them. We’re not going to stand idly by and let the president steal our freeways and impose such a confiscatory tax scheme without our consent,” promises Terri Hall, Founder and Director of both groups.

Secretary of Transportation Anthony Foxx expects to shore-up the federal highway trust fund that used to be fully funded by gas tax receipts alone, with corporate tax reform, which is code for corporate tax hikes.

“So everybody is going to be hit with tax hikes under Obama’s proposal. Corporations and commuters alike,” Hall notes.

Hall’s Texas organizations are not alone. A new national group, Alliance for Toll-free Interstates (ATFI), that boasts corporate members such as UPS and FedEx, also opposes lifting the ban on tolling existing interstates.

Miles Morin, spokesman for ATFI told Overdrive.com: “Tolling existing interstates is inefficient, causes traffic diversion, and increases supply chain costs that hurt businesses and consumers. Transportation infrastructure needs improvements, but of all the ways to fund them, tolling existing interstates is the worst.”

Former Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison ensured Texans were protected against tolls on existing interstates when she imposed a ban in 2007 when the Texas Department of Transportation sent a report to congress asking to do so. TURF and TFF want that protection to remain in place.

Trucking companies aren’t happy either. American Trucking Association and Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association came out strong against the president’s bill citing tolls, tolling existing interstates, and using both toll revenue and gas taxes for projects other than highways — ie, rail and transit.

Hall agrees: “This president has a love affair with rail, but the cost to build and maintain a rail system far exceeds the cost of roadways. Since the vast majority of travelers prefer the convenience and flexibility of the personal auto, the priority should be on highways. Using taxes imposed on motorists for rail is a form of socialism and yet another example of taxes collected for one purpose being diverted to another.”

Gas tax hasn’t kept up
The federal gas tax is a fixed amount – 18.4 cents a gallon – that’s remained unchanged since 1993. Since it’s not pegged to inflation, the revenues haven’t kept pace leading congress scrambling to shore-up the highway trust fund that’s going bankrupt. It currently costs about one penny a mile to use a gas-tax funded road (closer to two cents when you add in state gasoline tax). With the national average price of gasoline at $3.69 a gallon, increasing the gas tax is a non-starter with most politicians, however. In contrast, tolls cost between 10 cents a mile up to 95 cents a mile when the toll project is privatized in a public-private partnership. So tolls represent an explosion in the cost to travel and dwarf any increase in the gas tax.

In 2009, when his former Secretary of Transportation Ray La Hood suggested a charge by the mile tax, Obama quickly slapped him down and said it was off the table. Imposing tolls on existing toll-free interstates is no less popular and is a form of charging travelers by the mile anyway.

Senate leadership has reached a tentative agreement on its highway bill that also includes tolling, public private partnerships, and billions in taxpayer-backed loans for toll projects. The House has not yet formally announced its bill. Conservatives favor reverting the highway program back to the states, but since most state highway programs receive approximately half of their funding from federal revenues, it’s unclear how this transition would occur.

To view a section by section analysis of the bill by the administration go here. View the full text of the president’s bill here.

Big rigs still drive on I-35, can't afford toll road

Posted on by

Link to article here.

The SH 130 toll road is the poster child for FAILED toll road policy in Texas. Taxpayers were sold the SH 130 toll road as the panacea to fix congestion on gridlocked I-35 through Austin. Politicians and planners said it would draw trucks off of I-35 and over to the toll road. As the article below demonstrates, it hasn’t worked. Truckers can’t afford the toll road any more than motorists can. In fact, the SH 130 toll road is SO EMPTY, a distressed airplane landed on it in the middle of what is supposed to be rush hour! If they really want to relieve I-35 traffic, they’d make SH 130 a FREE bypass route. But as the Texas Turnpike Authority spokesman says below, the government has no motivation to fix I-35 traffic since it means fewer customers for their toll road.

Big rigs still drive on I-35, despite alternative routes
by ANDREW HORANSKY / KVUE News
kvue.com
Friday, May 7

When the SH-130 toll road opened a year ago this week, it was supposed to ease congestion on Interstate 35.  It was also supposed to move cars and trucks from one end of Austin to the other more quickly.
But recent KVUE helicopter video shows a different picture.  Traffic remains congested on I-35, and SH-130 is empty.  The Texas Turnpike Authority has a theory on why.

“A lot of traffic is still coming to destinations in Austin,” said Turnpike Director Mark Tomlinson.  “And if they are, then probably I-35 is going to be the choice for a bigger percentage of that traffic.”

Though some big rig drivers told KVUE the toll road works well, they said they cannot justify the expense.  Ken Dukes says he stays on I-35 because it costs him $27 to take SH-130.

“Yeah, it’s 45 minutes to an hour and a half of my time,” he said, “but it’s not worth $27.”

Others say the saving of time is worth their money.

“Absolutely,” said William Brown, driver.  “It wouldn’t make sense for me to go through that traffic every day.”

A spokesperson for the Texas Turnpike Authority believes it will take time, as well as more congestion along I-35, before the public fully embraces the benefits of the SH 130 toll road.

That 130 project commences in 2012, when it will connect I-35 in Georgetown to I-10 in Seguin.

Toll roads not a good fit for San Antonio

Posted on by

The people of this community have expressed time and again in every way available to them that they DO NOT want toll roads. With tourism such a major industry and economic engine for our region and the adverse impacts of a high cost of transportation on the region’s economy, toll roads are not the right fit for San Antonio, nor are they sustainable. They will bury us in debt to the tune of BILLIONS with no way out (except a taxpayer bailout and draconian tax hikes). When the cost of transportation goes up, driving goes down.

Toll roads rely on ever increasing traffic volumes and more driving to pay off the debt of toll roads, which is anti-thetical to the economic reality of what occurs when the cost of driving goes up…driving goes down and so does toll usage. Also, increasing the cost of transportation through tolling makes the the cost of goods go up, which everyone pays whether they take the toll road or not. San Antonians cannot afford tolls, when a third of Bexar County doesn’t make enough money to cover their basic needs for daily living. San Antonio has also been ranked by Forbes Magazine as one of the top 10 cities hardest hit by high gas prices. When tolls are like adding $4.00-$17.00 more to every gallon of gas you buy (for toll rates from 25 cents up to 75 cents per mile as we’re seeing around the state), they’re completely out of reach for the vast majority of San Antonians.

Based on the MPO plans, it claims a funding gap figure of $18 billion. To put it in perspective, that’s like saying they need more than $10,000 from every man, woman, and child in San Antonio in the next 25 years…that’s from every person in San Antonio, not just motorists, and that’s $40,000 from a family of 4! A study conducted by the Surface Transportation Project published in June of 2005, shows the two biggest costs for every household since 1984 are housing and transportation and account for 52% of the average family’s budget (or $21,213 a year)…the highest level in 20 years! Now compare that with the median household income in San Antonio of only about $36,000 a year and compare it with TxDOT’s claim they need $40,000 from the average family in San Antonio in the next 25 years, and you’ll see this will not only cripple the economy, it’ll tax people into bankruptcy. Their plan is unrealistic and totally unsustainable! With 57 toll projects in the MPO’s plans, there will be no escape form this new tax on driving.
Add to that, San Antonio has been consistently shorted the highway funds that it sends to Austin and Washington. In addition, vehicle sales tax revenues have been dumped into general revenue instead of going to roads as the taxpayers intended. Ending this diversion of funds amounts to $2-3 billion a year (on track for $4 billion this year, this reaps more than doubling the gas tax) for roadways, and would nearly triple our region’s money for roads WITHOUT RAISING TAXES! Restitution needs to be made before ANY taxpayer is asked to pay more.

As long as ANY project is marked “toll” in the MPO’s TIP (and there are 57 of them), the RMA (which is the tolling authority) has control of the project and a vested interest in ensuring projects remain tolled even when new sources of revenue become available. RMA Chair Bill Thornton promised on WOAI radio January 14, 2009 that they’d fix 281 non-toll if they got a new source of funds. When stimulus funds became available, the RMA STILL submitted the project as a toll project (they planned to build it with stimulus money and still charge users a toll to drive on it, a DOUBLE TAX). The FHWA also informed MPO Chairman, Commissioner Tommy Adkisson, that as long as a project is marked toll in the MPO plans, it will be done as a toll project.

With 800 people packing an auditorium in October 2009 to tell the MPO they don’t want toll roads (and only 100 got to testify with all but 7 against), and with MPO Board members assuring the public that both toll and non-toll options are on the table for 281 and 1604, how can they have an ounce of credibility when both are marked toll projects in the MPO’s TIP and when the tolling authority (RMA) is conducting the “study” of the options? How can the MPO have any credibility that non-toll options are even being studied when its attempt to find a contractor to do an independent study of non-toll options yielded ZERO takers?

This demands ACTION, not words, and must be remedied.

MPO MUST remove all toll projects from its plans

The federal government requires an agency to show a reasonable source of funding for a project in order to place it in an MPO plan. The RMA can’t show any of its toll roads are funded by any reasonable funding sources since toll revenue bonds won’t cover 100% of the project costs and all of them need massive public subsidies. In other words, none of the toll projects in the TIP are toll viable (meaning they cannot pay for themselves with the toll revenues of projected users).

TIFIA loans can only fund up to a third of the project costs. The current federal TIFIA loan pot of money is EMPTY, and there’s a cloud over the program after the first PPP toll road to receive a TIFIA loan went bankrupt a few months ago (at the hands of an Australian firm, Macquarie. (Read more here). The taxpayers aren’t going to get their money back, and many in Congress are doubting the efficacy of this controversial program that has, up until now, been used as a backstop to primarily benefit private toll operators at taxpayer expense. The TIFIA program may or may not be funded in the next federal highway bill, and there’s talk that the focus be shifted away from funding PPP & toll projects and directed to more mass transit and rail projects. Yet the RMA lists it as a “reasonable” source of funding for both the 281 and 1604 toll projects.

Second, TxDOT issued a letter to the MPO last fall saying the Texas Mobility Fund money ($200 million) isn’t available in one chunk any longer, it’s only available in $25 million chunks over 7 years (2012-2019). So how is this a “reasonable” source of revenue for the RMA’s toll road when the entire sum is needed in 2012 for just 281? So with two-thirds of the 281 project revenues in doubt (TIFIA and TMF), the RMA cannot demonstrate that the 281 toll project is funded by any reasonable sources of revenue. Ditto for segments of 1604 that also rely on TMF or TIFIA funds.

The RMA also has to spend $83 million on ROW acquisition for 281 (the figure given in the last TIP), when the MPO does NOT have to come up with that sum under a non-tolled scenario (since TxDOT funds ROW out of a different pot of money apart from the MPO). This ROW cost thereby drives up the project cost that the RMA bonds have to cover.

So with the RMA Chairman admitting the toll funding is a mere “placeholder” to keep certain road projects in the MPO plans, why can’t a non-toll source of funding be used as a placeholder instead and keep the plans toll-neutral, which they claim is their goal?

For instance, using the Zachry estimate for US 281 north of Loop 1604 from 2005, the cost to fix 281 as a freeway would be less than $200 million. The 2005 plan cost is $78 million for the first 3 miles (and that was the actual contract bid price, not an estimate, when construction costs were much higher). Extrapolate that for the 7.8 mile project area, and the cost is actually UNDER $200 million ($160-$170 million). So a $200 million project cost (with some flexibility to add extra overpasses where needed) is perfectly reasonable and is based on actual construction costs. No one has yet to give a single reason why this estimate isn’t bonafide when Zachry’s proposal had engineering and the contract had already been let (prior to clearance being yanked). Clay Smith of TxDOT stated on the record in a Technical Advisory Committee meeting last fall that the Zachry proposal is the “actual” cost, not TxDOT’s estimates.

With $3 billion more in Prop 12 bonds are expected to be approved by the legislature next session (they issued only $2 billion of the $5 billion voters approved last session), and Speaker Joe Straus announcing at the NE Partnership meeting April 15 that there is near unanimous support to end at least some of the gas tax diversions, we can use some gas tax revenues with a mix of Prop 12 bonds (or even just solely Prop 12 bonds) as the “reasonable” anticipated source of revenue to fund 281 as a freeway in the TIP to keep it toll-neutral. Prop 12 is a more reasonable expected source of revenue than the RMA’s pot of funds listed in the current TIP. With the current batch of Prop 12 monies netting our region about $200 million, a $3 billion issuance would net us closer to $300 million. That would more than cover a non-toll fix to 281.

The Legislature has also placed restrictions on using Prop 12 and other bonds backed by general revenue (and the majority of Texas taxpayers) for toll roads, since it’s a DOUBLE TAX to build a road with general funds and charge taxpayers AGAIN (a toll tax) to use the public road.

Return to sustainable transportation policy. Restore credibility and heed the public outcry. Remove toll roads from all MPO plans.

Express-News sold out for tolls

Posted on by

Bruce Davidson, author of the column below, heads the Editorial Board at the Express-News. He, and the paper (as evidenced by their coverage since they laid off the excellent, unbiased, and very fair transportation reporter Pat Driscoll), are sold out on tolls. This is one of many editorials that read like an RMA press release. Whatever RMA Chair Bill Thornton speaketh, Davidson prints as Gospel.

Whenever we’ve attempted to go to the Editorial Board to dialogue about the toll issue, they flatly ignore us and our concerns (as well as elected officials, attorneys, certified planners, and other experts who have joined us) and print a negative editorial in response to our “visit.” After all, the paper has the establishment to please, never mind the Express-News is bleeding readers. Why? Because of columns, editorials, and stories like this one. Or perhaps it’s because the RMA has paid the Express-News nearly $25,000 in government advertising.

I find the first line of this column inexplicable. How can we NOT blame the tolling authority, which is precisely what the RMA is, for tolling our existing freeways? Though there’s plenty of blame to go around, including the people Davidson cites, our state lawmakers led by Rick Perry (we would add there are culprits who have approved and voted for this at EVERY level of government, local, state, and federal), it defies logic NOT to address the RMA’s culpability in the toll road fight.

The RMA is a Board of UN-elected bureaucrats appointed by YOUR county commissioners, who have given them the authority to levy taxes (toll taxes) without answering directly to the taxpayers (which is taxation without representation). Their only source of revenue is tolling (and a heap of loans from the city and county and grants from TxDOT to keep them afloat until they tap the vein of your wallet with their first toll road). RMAs were created in state law for the sole purpose of tolling and off-loading the State’s job to build STATE highways to local government and its taxpayers.

This notion that the RMA “doesn’t care where the money comes from, they just want to fix the road” is a farce. They’re a tolling authority! They exist to toll roads! Most importantly, the needed fix to 281 was already paid for with gas taxes until TxDOT made the money disappear sometime in mid-2008. So the toll agenda for 281 has NOTHING to do with lack of funds. They had the funds…it’s about tapping a new revenue stream and levying a discriminatory, targeted tax on 281 users in order to fund 1604 (which they don’t have the money for). The fact 281 already had the funding is one the RMA and the Express-News like to ignore so they can push toll roads, making them appear the ONLY option.

Then, the stimulus money the RMA is using to build HALF of a non-toll interchange (for the price of a WHOLE interchange) is a one time deal. We’ve long objected to the RMA even doing a non-toll project, especially with the pricetag they can’t justify ($143 million for just the four southern ramps of the interchange when the RMA’s published price to build the northern ramps in 2018 dollars is $59 million. If they can build half of the interchange for $59 million, they can surely build the whole thing NOW for $120 million! For comparison, the 410/281 interchange just built cost $155 million). What on earth are we paying our highway department to do if we now have these high paid bureaucrats at the RMA sitting around duplicating TxDOT’s role and charging us $20 million in “management fees” to oversee the interchange project that TxDOT should be doing (without the added cost)? The RMA is a second-tier bureaucracy and a taxpayer rip-off from start to finish.

Here are just two timelines (here and here) to give you a flavor of how corrupt and untrustworthy this RMA is. Then here’s a few other zingers. The RMA operates in secrecy and has refused to hand over the financial guts to its potential toll agreements BEFORE the contract gets signed (when the public can actually DO something to stop provisions that are not in the public interest). It hides behind a state law that allows these agencies to keep toll viability studies, the market valuation, and other key financial details SECRET from the public AND even YOUR elected officials. In fact, prior to a crucial vote on financing the 281 and 1604 toll projects at the MPO December 7, 2007, the RMA did not give MPO Board members this information prior to their vote, causing them to vote BLIND.

During the last legislative session, the RMA spent $32,000 of YOUR money to hire a lobbyist to lobby state lawmakers for toll roads and more taxing authority to levy ANY kind of tax to raid your pocketbook. The RMA also recently came out in favor of thwarting legal challenges to its unwanted toll projects by lobbying to force binding arbitration. Then, the RMA Board just voted to do all of its business BEHIND CLOSED DOORS, out of the public eye, unless they have an “actionable item” to vote on. Plus, the RMA has 8 employees whose total salaries with benefits equal more than $1 million dollars annually. All but two employees make six figures, which is totally out of balance with the median household income in San Antonio, which is $36,000/yr.

Credibility gap
As long as the 281 & 1604 projects are marked “toll” in the MPO’s plans, the RMA has control of the project and a vested interest in ensuring it remains tolled even when new sources of revenue become available. The RMA is conducting its own environmental studies on both the 281 and 1604 toll projects (the fox guarding the hen house), yet to read the Express-News editorial (see below), you’d think the RMA was a paragon of diplomacy, reaching out to its “enemies.” Diplomacy? Pleez…their consultants told the community advisory groups that the RMA didn’t have to listen to our feedback nor the public feedback at the hearings either. The RMA is using these “community groups” as window dressing, nothing more. After repeated attempts to sit down with the RMA and work out many issues regarding these projects, they’ve REFUSED to work with ANYONE who gets in the way of their toll agenda. The RMA opposed the citizens’ call for a temporary superstreet fix on 281, too, until they figured out that doing the project could boost their PR with fed-up residents and give them something to do until their first toll project brings home the bacon.

RMA Chair Bill Thornton promised on WOAI radio January 14, 2009 that they’d fix 281 non-toll if they got a new source of funds. When stimulus funds became available, the RMA STILL submitted the project as a toll project (they planned to build it with stimulus money and still charge users a toll to drive on it, a DOUBLE TAX), which is proof-positive that even when they get a new pot of money to do something non-toll, the RMA still pushes its toll agenda…regardless of the opposition to it.

Also, the FHWA also informed MPO Chairman Commissioner Tommy Adkisson that as long as a project is marked toll in the MPO plans, it will be done as a toll project. With 800 people packing an auditorium in October 2009 to tell the MPO they don’t want toll roads (and only 100 got to testify with all but 7 against), and with MPO Board members & the RMA assuring the public that both toll and non-toll options are on the table for 281 and 1604, how can they have an ounce of credibility when both are marked toll projects in the MPO’s TIP and when the tolling authority (RMA) is conducting the “study” of the options? How can the MPO have any credibility that non-toll options are even being studied when its attempt to find a contractor to do an independent study of non-toll options (apart from the RMA) yielded ZERO takers?

Toll roads NOT inevitable
Then, Davidson would have us accept his premise that toll roads are inevitable because lawmakers in Austin refuse to raise your taxes. First of all, tolls are taxes and they have yet to hesitate to charge commuters the MOST EXPENSIVE tax to fund roads. Second, where is Davidson’s call to end the diversions to the gas tax we ALREADY PAY? Why would any thinking person ask government to raise taxes when they’re misappropriating the taxes we already send them? Third, why isn’t Davidson insisting San Antonio get back the money we already send to Austin and Washington that we’re shorted before he advocates for higher taxes (tolls)? Lastly, ending the vehicle sales tax diversion (that’s being dumped into general revenue instead of going to roads) would nearly triple our region’s road money WITHOUT RAISING TAXES! But Davidson doesn’t think that way. He’s an extension of the government bureaucrats at the RMA.

Goes to show, one must do his/her due diligence before believing what you read in the Express-News.
________________________________________________________
Austin’s aversion to tax hikes makes toll roads inevitable
By Bruce Davidson – Express-News

Web Posted: 05/13/2010

Don’t blame the Alamo Regional Mobility Authority when U.S. 281 from north of Loop 1604 becomes a toll road.

RMA officials are in the midst of the lengthy Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process. They are studying three possible approaches to dealing with the nightmarish traffic on U.S. 281.

One scenario involves overpasses at the key intersections and non-continuous frontage, as RMA spokesman Leroy Alloway described it. Another would have expressway lanes and continuous frontage road from Loop 1604 to the Bexar County line. And a third option would have elevated U.S. 281 lanes, leaving most of the existing structure in place.

RMA Chairman Bill Thornton emphasizes that while the project is listed as a toll road in Metropolitan Planning Organization plan, that status is a placeholder.

Read the rest of the story here.

______________________________________________________
Agua should drop legal threat
Express-News Editorial Board
Web Posted: 05/11/2010

The Alamo Regional Mobility Authority is engaging in some highway diplomacy. Rather than allowing plans for road construction in the U.S. 281-Loop 1604 corridor to get bogged down in challenges, the RMA is bringing potential adversaries to the table and making them part of the development process.

The RMA has created community advisory committees for both of the two major highway projects it is managing — a 7.9-mile segment of U.S. 281 north of Loop 1604 to the county line and a 37-mile stretch of Loop 1604 from Interstate 35 North to Highway 90 West.

Among the stakeholders on these committees are representatives of homeowners associations, school districts and the business and development community.

The RMA has also included groups with which it has traditionally had an adversarial relationship: the Alamo Sierra Club, Aquifer Guardians in Urban Areas, Greater Edwards Aquifer Alliance, San Antonio Toll Party and Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom.

This diplomatic approach is a wise one. A good faith effort by members of the advisory groups can streamline the process for road construction and avoid lawsuits and political challenges that are both costly and time consuming.

Read the rest of the story here.

Austin's toll revenue projections cut in HALF

Posted on by

Link to article here.

Note how Austin’s toll revenue projections are cut by more than HALF in their long-range plan. Also of note is the acknowledgment that selling our highways to foreign companies in “concession” deals has fallen out of favor with the legislature. That’s due to the grassroots’ blowback over the last 4-5 years. Stay vigilant so we can keep it that way!

Regional transportation plan nears approval
CAMPO 2035 plan includes reduced road spending and much more for rail, other transit.
By Ben Wear AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF

Published: 8:12 p.m. Sunday, May 9, 2010

Think of a blueprint, one written in chalk.

In the case of Central Texas’ official transportation plan for the next 25 years, which a committee of local leaders probably will approve later this month, what goes into that blueprint to a great degree depends on who gets to hold the chalk. The proposed CAMPO 2035 plan is several hundred pages long with several hundred road, rail, bicycle and pedestrian projects in it that add up to $26.8 billion.

That’s almost $4 billion more than the last version of the 25-year plan, approved in 2005 by the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization board. But that money might not all materialize. Those numbers assume a much higher rate of Capital Metro sales tax revenue than in recent years, as well as aggressive road bonding in Williamson County.

The new plan includes a much higher percentage of rail and other transit spending than its predecessor and a sharply reduced amount for maintaining highways. In the introduction, the plan claims to embrace a new philosophy of transportation planning based on encouraging dense centers of development rather than continuing suburban sprawl willy-nilly.

But even those working on the plan say the focus on centers — not an emphasis of previous plans — will make little real-world difference. The plan is only as accurate as its assumptions about the future, they said, and making predictions about the next quarter-century is inevitably an exercise in guesswork.

“To borrow a Hemingway phrase, it’s pretty to think we can plan 25 years in advance,” said Hays County Commissioner Jeff Barton , a Democrat who serves on the CAMPO board. “There’s value in the exercise, but we shouldn’t kid ourselves.”

What’s in the plan matters, however, because under federal law a transportation project can’t get federal dollars — almost all highway and transit projects are at least partially funded by the federal government — unless the project is in the long-range plan. But the 19-member CAMPO board, made up mostly of local elected officials from Travis, Williamson, Hays, Bastrop and Caldwell counties, can amend the plan at any time. And there will be another wholesale rewrite five years from now, five years after that, and so on.

The CAMPO board, recipient of more than 4,000 public comments submitted on the draft plan in recent months, will take one last listen in a public hearing today. The meeting will start at 6 p.m. in Ballroom B of the Austin Convention Center.

The board probably will vote on the plan May 24, officials said.

If it is approved as written in draft form — and some CAMPO members still intend to push for changes — the plan would include:

• $2 billion for more passenger rail, including $857 million for the City of Austin’s proposed streetcar initiative, $467 million for a segment of a commuter line from Austin to San Antonio, $327 million for an Elgin-to-downtown Austin commuter line on Capital Metro’s railroad and $149 million for expansion of the MetroRail Red Line.

Rail and bus operations account for $10.3 billion of the plan, almost double from the 2030 plan. The money for this includes an estimated $6.6 billion from Capital Metro’s 1 percent sale tax, a $3 billion increase over the last plan’s 25-year estimate. The plan assumes, based on numbers from Capital Metro, that the agency’s sales tax revenue will increase 5.3 percent a year for the next quarter-century, more than double the average increase over the past decade.

• $10.9 billion for highway and road expansion, a 6.5 percent decrease from the 2030 plan. And the drop would be much greater but for an aggressive forecast by Williamson County — some CAMPO members from other counties say unrealistically aggressive — that it will spend $4.3 billion on new roads. The plan assumes that Williamson County voters will approve $425 million in road bonds every other year from 2011 to 2027.

Travis County Judge Sam Biscoe, chairman of the CAMPO board, said having all that money in the plan, along with dozens of projects tied to it, would give Williamson County an unfair advantage in getting federal funds in future years. Travis County, by contrast, estimates it would have $1.1 billion for new or expanded roads over the next 25 years.

“We have to increase ours, or Williamson County has to reduce theirs,” Biscoe said. “I expect that to be discussed on May 24.”

Williamson County Commissioner Cynthia Long, vice chairwoman of the CAMPO board, said it’s a matter of need.

“What we’ve seen is very low tolerance among our citizens for congestion, and we are responding to that,” Long said. “Rather than asking why Williamson County’s number is so high, I would ask why Travis County’s number is so low.”

• $5 billion of state, federal and toll revenue for roads, down almost 56 percent from the $11.3 billion in the 2030 plan. That reflects the diminishing power of gas taxes to pay for new roads, a trend made worse in Texas because the state Department of Transportation in recent years has borrowed heavily against future gas tax revenue to pay for projects now completed. And the estimate of surplus toll revenue (what’s available after paying debt service and operations costs) from Central Texas turnpikes is down sharply, from $3.2 billion in the past plan to $1.3 billion.

As a result, local governments would contribute a greater portion of road spending, including state highways that historically were exclusively TxDOT’s province.

“That’s something we’re going to have to address at the state level,” Barton said. “And soon.”

• No spending over the next 25 years to expand the capacity of either Interstate 35 through Central Texas or Loop 360 (Capital of Texas Highway) in West Austin, two of the area’s most congested highways. Joe Cantalupo , CAMPO’s executive director, said that TxDOT is studying what to do about I-35 and that the plan would be amended as plans coalesce.

“We’re not looking at it and saying, ‘Oh, there’s no problem, with 2009” Cantalupo said.

The 2030 plan envisioned making Loop 360 a toll road, with frontage roads alongside, and doing so by leasing the road to a private company. Such “concession” agreements fell out of favor with the Legislature, and new ones are no longer legal under state law. Given that and the looming cash crunch at TxDOT, Cantalupo said, Loop 360 expansion fell out of the new plan.

LaHood: If you build it, they will come

Posted on by

By Terri Hall
San Antonio Express News/Houston Examiner
May 6, 2010

It doesn’t take long to size-up a gathering of transportation lobbyists hosted by the U.S. Secretary of Transportation, Ray LaHood, when 99% of the feedback at a supposed “town hall” ran to the mic to ask for their industry’s piece of the taxpayer pie.

Scarcely a handful of taxpayer advocates dotted the invite-only crowd at the George R. Brown Convention Center in Houston May 5, and none were happy with what they heard. The purpose of the gathering was supposed to be to solicit feedback on the next federal highway bill. The last one, called SAFETEA-LU, was a disaster for taxpayers.

Remember the bridge to nowhere? How ’bout the 6,000+ earmarks for congressional pet projects that had little or no relevance to the federal highway system? What about the strings it attached to our gas taxes that hold our money hostage for “enhancements” like landscaping and free WI-FI at rest stops? Worse still, are the programs in SAFETEA-LU that use “innovative financing” to sell America’s highways to foreign companies in sweetheart deals (called public private partnerships or PPPs) propped-up with low interest, taxpayer-backed loans (TIFIA loans and private activity bonds or PABs). It’s public money for private profits.

But the majority of the invited speakers, as well as LaHood, advocated PPPs. During one of the panel discussions, the USDOT’s Chief Financial Officer, Chris Bertram, actually had the audacity to claim the feds don’t push innovative financing (what are toll credits, TIFIA loans, and PABs if not federal incentives for innovative financing?), and then proceeded to say how PPPs need to stay part of the mix. So much for a “listening session.”

Bertram also attempted to defend the bankruptcy of the San Diego PPP toll road, the first to receive a federal TIFIA loan, saying it had little to do with the lack of traffic to pay for the debt, and was a result of contractors arguing over cost of the road. The tollway had been open to traffic for over two years, and he claims the bankruptcy is due to quibbling over construction costs? When the projected traffic volume was off by nearly 40,000 vehicles per day, it’s beyond disingenuous to blame the default on anything other than flawed traffic projections!

Tolling existing interstates rises again

Another panelist advocated the new highway bill lift the ban on tolling existing interstates. This is what un-elected bureaucrats are doing on the taxpayers’ dime…listening to high-powered lobbyists find every way under sunshine to not only make taxpayers pay dearly for roads, but also to make them pay TWICE!

“Houstonians are willing to pay to get out of congestion,” noted Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee in her remarks. I’ll say, whether they like it or not, too. The new toll lanes, called “managed lanes,” on I-10 are 100% paid for with gas taxes and should have opened as free lanes. But instead, Houston elected officials chose to charge motorists tolls to access these lanes that are rarely used. With elected officials more than happy to double tax its citizens, perhaps that’s why Houston residents experience some of the highest transportation costs in the country.

If you build it, they will come

One of LaHood’s initiatives for the next highway bill is to “keep our communities economically competitive and affordable.” When foreign-owned toll roads (using PPPs) charge commuters 75 cents PER MILE to drive, that’s like adding $17 to every gallon of gas you buy. That’s not only unaffordable, it’s unsustainable! Texas Transportation Commission Chair Deirdre Delisi admitted in testimony February 1 that PPPs cost more due to the private operators’ building in profit (and other records show it’s guaranteed profit!).

Also unsustainable is this notion of LaHood’s that “if you build it, they will come.” Not so with toll roads. SH 130 is the poster child of failed, underutilized toll roads. The taxpayers are paying to bailout this tollway EVERY year for the life of its debt. It’s so empty that a distressed airplane landed on it in the middle of “rush hour.” SH 130 was sold to the public as the panacea to unclog I-35 through Austin by getting the truck traffic off of the city’s main artery. Few can afford to pay the $13/day to take the toll road, so the tollway sits near empty while I-35 stays mired in gridlock. If they really want to solve congestion on I-35, they’d turn SH 130 into a FREEway so truckers and those who need to get beyond Austin will take it.

Full court press by Trans Texas Corridor lobbyists

One of the first questions after LaHood’s speech was offered by Alliance for I-69 lobbyist Gary Bushell. Bushell is the guy TxDOT illegally hired with taxpayer money to lobby for the Trans Texas Corridor TTC-69/I-69. Bushell also cut a backroom deal with Senator Robert Nichols during the waning days of the 81st (2009) legislative session not only to ensure TTC-69 would continue (despite a bill that would have repealed the Trans Texas Corridor as Texans have demanded — the bill never became law), but also to ensure the private developers, ACS of Spain and Zachry of San Antonio, would never lose money on the deal.

Bushell said the TTC-69/I-69 environmental document was ready for approval by LaHood’s department and asked for a green light, to which LaHood responded, “Sure.”

The lobbyist for the Ports to Plains Trans Texas Corridor (often called a “priority corridor” by Congress is slated to go from Mexico, through Del Rio, San Angelo and Lubbock, Texas through Denver, Colorado up into Alberta, Canada) was also sure to plug his trade corridor.

Exotic financing = RISKY financing

Jeff Moseley, a panelist with the Greater Houston Partnership (Chamber of Commerce), was a voice of reason emphasizing that when the federal government fails to properly fund roads, it forces the states to resort to “exotic” financing (think “innovative financing” where taxpayers subsidize private toll road profiteers with the same multi-leveraged, risky debt financing schemes that caused the sub prime mortgage crisis). Texas power-brokers have fast-tracked and embraced such “exotic” (and risky) reliance on toll roads thanks to Rick Perry. However, Texans continue to revolt against such tax and spend schemes, resulting in their biggest grassroots victory to date: KILLING public private partnerships last year. The real challenge that lies ahead is how to keep it that way.

Read TURF’s written comments submitted to the Secretary of Transportation here.

_________________________________________________________________

Link to article here.

LaHood: President still opposed to gas tax increase
By Michael Lindenbarger
Dallas Morning News
May 6, 2010

775.thm.jpegIn a speech in Houston Wednesday, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said Congress and the White House are largely in sync about what ought to be in the next big transportation reauthorization bill. (Photo: Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood speaks while IBM chairman and CEO Samuel J. Palmisano looks on. Source: IBM.)

“There is great agreement between the DOT and the Congress about what should be in the bill,” LaHood said. “The dilemma is finding $500 billion to make it happen.”

So I asked him afterward, what are the ideas being kicked around to find that money?

“There are lots of ideas. The president proposed an infrastrcuture fund, that’s a $4 billion initiative. We still have the highway trust fund, even though we know that it’s insufficient. And there are going to be some PPP’s.”

What about a gas tax increase?

“The President has consistently opposed raising the gas tax,” he said.

So what will the authorization bill look like? Here’s what he said in his speech:

“Having gone through this process, we’ve committed to a new recipe of legislative ingredients. It consists of: Ingredients that improve safety and reduce injuries and fatalities; ingredients that keep our communities economically competitive and affordable; ingredients that maintain the reliability, capacity, and efficiency of our entire transportation network; ingredients that give people more than one choice about how to get from one place to another – so kids can walk or bike to school and veterans or seniors can get to a doctor’s appointment if they can’t drive; ingredients that reduce America’s reliance on oil and greenhouse gas emissions.Blended together, this mix will help ensure that a student in Houston can go from a neighborhood with safe streets to a school that prepares her to collaborate and compete in the global economy. It will help ensure that student’s parents go from an affordable home to a job that pays the bills.

Now, we need to figure out how to pay for it.”