Link to editorial here.

Professor Merrifield and I agree on a lot of things like the danger of granting 50 year monopolies over our public infrastructure using secret contracts, and the folly of free lanes being permanently congested to force motorists onto adjacent toll lanes. But some economists and transportation analysts would argue there’s no need for congestion tolling since congestion during peak hours is incentive enough to discourage non-essential trips until non-peak hours.

Also, in light of escalating gas prices with no end in sight, there is already a hefty financial constraint to discourage non-essential driving without TOLLS. I’m also convinced that increasing the cost transportation hurts the economy, period. The two biggest costs in every household are housing and transportation. Increasing transportation costs blows a gaping hole into the family budget. Read more here. Also, there are a host of non-toll, more affordable, less invasive ways to solve congestion relief other than tolls, which are the most expensive option. Read more here.

See thoughts on congestion by Public Policy Analyst Barry Klein in Houston following Professor Merrifield’s editorial.

Comment: Tolling roads during rush hour a smarter idea
By John Merrifield
Express-News
08/12/2006

State law allows only a wacky approach to tolls. It needs to be changed.
The state-mandated choice is between “free” lanes and toll lanes. Sounds great, right? You don’t have to pay the toll until the traffic gets bad enough that the toll seems a better choice.

But think what that means! The toll lanes will sit empty until the free lane traffic slows a lot, something that happens on our most heavily traveled roads only about six hours a day. Because of the toll cost, free lane users will still suffer congestion delays.

To pay for the toll lanes, used only six hours daily by a fraction of the total motorists, the toll will have to be quite high. Given that, I doubt the 12- to 18-cents-per-mile estimated toll charge will be enough to pay for the toll lanes. But even that toll rate will cost users about $500 per year. That assumes a 10-mile, one-way commute 200 days per year.

So state law mandates congested “free” lanes alongside expensive toll lanes that will sit there unused roughly 18 hours per day. It’s the same kind of absurd, limited choice we have now for schools: a “Nation at Risk”-quality, free public school system or better, expensive private schools. I’m not against that choice, but we must do a lot better. Likewise, having toll lanes next to free lanes is better than having just the free lanes, but there are much better strategies.

One hundred percent reliance on gasoline taxes makes as little sense as toll lanes alongside free lanes. It would take a massive tax increase to pay for enough road capacity to avoid persistent rush hour congestion. Note that Atlanta’s proposal to expand Interstate 75 from 15 to 23 lanes epitomizes the result of the latter.

Fortunately, a better approach already exists in the mainstream economics literature. It needs to be thought of as a third side to the debate about how to minimize traffic jams. It entails a toll for peak period use of congested road segments; yes, “tolls,” but only during rush hours where travel demand is high.

It’s not double taxation. The congestion-period tolls fund additional lanes. Since the economic basis for a toll during peak traffic periods is that each motorist imposes a delay cost on other motorists, every rush hour traveler must be charged. With everyone paying, it takes a lot smaller toll to pay for additional lanes, and every motorist benefits all day long.

It also avoids the obvious waste of building roads that no one uses most of the time and that just a few people use when the free lanes clog.

Toll payers get two direct benefits from the congestion fee: less traffic when they pay and more lanes to keep traffic down as the city grows. Congestion tolls also have enormous indirect benefits, including less auto maintenance, fewer accidents and reduced air pollution.

Much of the gas tax revenue has been diverted to non-highway uses and for highways in other places. But even with the additional highway capacity that the diverted money would have funded, congestion tolling would still be appropriate for some road segments to manage demand and to fund additional lanes at key places.

—————————————————————————————————————————
The Myth of Congestion and the Longer Commute
By Barry Klein
Public Policy Consultant
Houston, TX
—————————————————————————————————————————
Several members of the Citizens Transportation Coalition and people interested in transportation issues have heard me talk about the work of transportation scholar Yacov Zahavi.Mr. Zahavi died several years ago. He was from Israel, worked for USDOT, and for a time in the early 1970s worked in Houston with the Houston Galveston Area Council. Alan Clark, the head of HGAC’s transportation section today, knew him in those days.Zahavi later worked for the World Bank. I am in touch with one of his former colleagues from that time who used to edit his papers.Yacov Zahavi did some fundamental research that is ignored by US transportation planners but has the intellectual power to change the policy debates in Houston and elsewhere where “congestion” is treated as a community problem.In fact, congestion is a subjective experience and people have different levels of tolerance for it. The Federal Highway Administration bluntly admits to this on its website. When individuals perceive themselves to have an intolerable congestion problem they usually find a way to resolve their problem. This phenomenon is unacknowledged by transportation planners.

There are 15,000 miles of road in Harris County. This network is a huge resource that allows for 100 million miles of travel during workdays. Much of the travel occurs at speeds above the legal limits, which is a sign the network is underutilized. Very importantly, this transportation resource allows individuals to adapt their travel activity based on their personal goals and needs, and levels of patience with traffic.

Here are three examples of how individuals in different social roles adapt their use of the road network and allow the commute time to stay under half an hour. Workers often-times relocate (not hard for renters), adjust their work hours and even change employers when traffic becomes irritating. Employers will relocate to parts of the region that are less congested or that put them close to the workforce that they desire. Retailers play a role, because of their habit of looking for under-served pockets of consumers and then set up stores in their proximity, which incidentally reduces congestion by giving consumers shorter shopping trips.

All these factors combine to disperse traffic over the road network. They each play a role in the on-going, unplanned but never ceasing trends that mitigate congestion.
By these spontaneous adjustments the average home-to-work commute time in Harris County sits at 27 minutes, roughly where it’s been for the last several decades. This information comes in a 2003 Census Bureau survey released this year (www.census.gov/acs).

Back to Zahavi… Zahavi’s research defined the idea of the “Travel-Time Budget.” The research showed that…
a) most of the world spends about an hour a day in travel
b) most commutes are under half an hour, and
c) Families spend about 12-15% of their disposable income for mobility.

Here are two papers by contemporary scholars that draw on Zahavi’s analyses.
The Evolution of Transport
Jesse H. Ausubel and Cesare Marchetti
The Industrial Physicist 7(2):20-24, April/May 2001.
http://phe.rockefeller.edu/TIP_transport/

Toward Green Mobility: The Evolution of Transport
Jesse H. Ausubel, Cesare Marchetti, and Perrin S. Meyer
European Review 6(2):143-162, 1998.
http://phe.rockefeller.edu/green_mobility/

This is a quote from the first paper:
“for humans, a large accessible territory means greater liberty in choosing the three points of gravity in of our lives: the home, the workplace, and the school. Four-fifths of all travel ends in this ambit.”

Mr. Ausubel, in an email to me several months ago, made this statement…

“We envision a transport system producing zero emissions and sparing the surface landscape, while people on average range hundreds of kilometers daily. We believe this prospect of “green mobility” is consistent in general principles with historical evolution. We lay out these general principles, extracted from widespread observations of human behavior over long periods, and use them to explain past transport and to project the next 50 to 100 years. Our picture emphasizes the slow penetration of new technologies of transport adding speed in the course of substituting for the old ones in terms of time allocation. We discuss serially and in increasing detail railroads, cars, airplanes, and magnetically levitated trains (maglevs).”

This is a link to a website featuring Zahavi’s papers:
http://www.surveyarchive.org/zahavi.html

A google search on Yacov Zahavi name will result in over 200 hits.

I think that the more people become aware of Zahavi’s work and its impact on the thinking of a number of urban scholars the more quickly will spread the understanding that congestion can actually be thought of as “self-limiting.”

Here are three links to pages on the Federal Highway Administration website to see more about how the FHWA views congestion: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/congestion/, http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/congestion/congsame.htm, and http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/congestion/congwhat.htm. On the last look for the link to Rethinking Traffic Congestion by Brian Taylor, the Director of the Institute of Transportation Studies at UCLA.

Several hundred Houston area residents will soon be engaged in an extensive regional planning process being conducted by HGAC with help from several local sponsors, including Blueprint Houston. By bearing in mind the work of Zahavi and his disciples, participants can treat with skepticism the description of future traffic conditions as projected by the men and women whose careers and incomes are tied to the idea that gridlock is Houston’s destiny unless billions of dollars in new road and transit facilities are constructed.

Henceforth, Houston area residents can do their infrastructure planning freed of the grip of “traffic panic.” New planning options are thereby opened up for consideration.

Yacov Zahavi’s research allows Houstonians to approach transportation questions much more calmly than we have in the past. Being aware of its existence means that, as we reach our private and collective conclusions on proposed infrastructure projects, our thinking can be based on a wider range of growth scenarios for the Houston area.

Link to article here.

Once again, Comal County and TxDOT officials are trying to bully the Bulverde City Council into going against their constituents to raise taxes to fund a STATE highway project. The Council was asking for very reasonable concessions (read more here), and TxDOT essentially told them “it’s our way or no way” even though they were asking the City for nearly $2 million to fund the project. TxDOT has every local government thinking it’s do it TxDOT’s way or it’ll be tolled.

If Judge Scheel thinks TxDOT isn’t going to toll everything as soon as it’s found “feasible,” he has some reading to do, like the Transportation Commission meeting minutes from Decmber 18, 2003 where they mandate ALL new road improvements in Texas will be studied for tolls first! It’s also a misstaement of fact to say tolls aren’t part of the pass through agreement since pass through financing is “shadow tolling” by TxDOT’s own admission at a recent MPO meeting, AND the possible future imposition of tolls are in the pass through contract on page 3.

Truth is, there’s a host of ways to fund highway improvements, but TxDOT refuses to implement them. Bottom line: Bulverde doesn’t want a massive 6 lane highway running through the Texas Hill Country. There’s evidence TxDOT wants to makes Hwy 46 a truck route to bypass San Antonio (See I-10 freight study recommendations. Click on Texas then scroll to San Antonio here.). RESIDENTS DON’T WANT IT and it violates Bulverde’s Master Plan. Not even US 281 has 6 lanes in Comal County and it carries more than twice the traffic. The problems on 46 are largely due to the school drop-off/pick-up which is more of a logistics problem rather than a capacity problem. TxDOT refuses to see this, the County refuses to see this, but thankfully, the City Council sees there are less invasive, more affordable solutions than jumping into a MAJOR highway expansion through small town USA!

Also note how TxDOT’s David Casteel implies there’s non-toll funds for Hwy 46 in Bulverde, but they won’t release those funds unless Bulverde gives TxDOT a blank check and cedes all input and control of the project to TxDOT, EVEN THOUGH THEY’RE ASKING BULVERDE FOR NEARLY $2 MILLION! This is standard operating procedure for TxDOT (read about their bullying tactics in El Paso here). There’s money, they simply use their unbridled power to extort more money from local governments for STATE highways which are the State’s responsibility.

Bulverde taking heat for shunning highway project
By Roger Croteau
Express-News Staff Writer
08/14/2006

NEW BRAUNFELS — The Bulverde City Council’s decision not to take part in a state project to widen Texas 46 will lead to even worse traffic jams as the road narrows on the outskirts of town, officials said.

And the project will cost the city much more later if it’s decided it’s needed then, Comal County officials warned.

The City Council last month rejected the Texas Department of Transportation plan to widen Texas 46 to six lanes through the city, with council members saying they wanted assurances that TxDOT would follow the city’s wishes on how to design the project.

An effort at last week’s council meeting to reconsider the matter was killed in a 3-2 vote.

“I have no reasonable explanation of what their thoughts were in turning down a $20 million project,” said County Judge Danny Scheel. “This was a one-of-a-kind deal, in my opinion, a sweetheart deal that will never be repeated.”

County Commissioner Jay Millikin said he understands the city’s reluctance to raise taxes to fund its share of right of way acquisition.

“But, in fact, it will be a bottleneck,” Millikin said. “As you reach the Bulverde city limits, it will be choked down.”

Bulverde was asked to provide about $800,000 for right of way and utility relocation costs and would have been responsible for about $1 million in interest payments on a loan to TxDOT that would provide the money to build the project.

But money was not the reason the council rejected the offer, Mayor Sarah Stevick said.

Council members wanted TxDOT to build the road at the width that was proposed but to only stripe four traffic lanes for now and add striping for the final two lanes in the future, when traffic counts warrant that much capacity.

Stevick said six lanes would be “just too big of a highway.” There were other design elements the city objected to, as well, she said.

“The council and some residents thought we had absolutely no say in the project at all,” Stevick said. “TxDOT said they would work with us, but could not guarantee anything.”

Stevick and Councilman Mike Mobley said they think the only way the topic will come back before the council is if TxDOT comes back with a new proposal that alleviates the city’s concerns.

TxDOT District Engineer David Casteel said the department will continue environmental and preparatory studies in case Bulverde changes its mind, but will only widen the highway from Loop 337 in New Braunfels to the Bulverde city limit.

He said a bottleneck on Texas 46 around U.S. 281 is a major concern. About 16,000 cars a day use Texas 46 there, and there are about eight wrecks a month.

“To say the least, we are perplexed and mystified by some of their (council’s) actions,” Casteel said. “We can’t let the money sit there waiting for Bulverde. I’ve got 12 counties, and every county out there has serious needs. We will put that money to work.”

As a result, he said, it could take several years for money to be available to widen the highway through Bulverde if the council decides later to pursue a project, and the funding scenario could be less favorable than what is being offered now.

Scheel predicted that any financing to widen Texas 46 in Bulverde later would include tolls. None are in the deal offered now.

Comal County officials persuaded TxDOT to offer a “pass through financing” plan to expedite construction, slated to start next year. The county and cities involved in the project will borrow $16 million to lend to TxDOT. The state will then pay back the principal to the county and cities over a few years, with the local governments paying the interest. The rest of the project’s $63 million price tag will be paid by the state.

The New Braunfels City Council and the Comal County Commission voted unanimously to take part in the project.

Link to WOAI article here.

Apparently, the nearly 14,000 Texans who sacrificed their time and traveled many miles on their dime with high gas prices to give public input on the Trans Texas Corridor don’t represent the majority of Texans and their opinions won’t make a difference in whether or not the corridor gets built, according to Rick Perry. So why have public hearings, Governor? If you want to know what the MAJORITY of Texans think about your corridor, why don’t you put it to a vote and we’ll gladly demonstrate WE’RE the majority! Your special interest elitist mindset will be your downfall on November 7. The PEOPLE are fed-up and determined to take their government back from “the few” and return it to the PEOPLE once again!

Perry Rejects TTC Opposition
Perry says toll road plans will go forward despite opposition voiced at public hearings
By Jim Forsyth
WOAI.com August 15, 2006

Hundreds of people showed up at three dozen public hearings over the past month to speak out on the proposed Trans Texas Corridor, the $175 billion system of toll roads Governor Perry has proposed for Texas.

The vast majority of the people who showed up at the hearings, by one estimate by a ratio of twenty to one, spoke out against the superhighways, claiming they would bisect farms and ranches, would be a giveaway to big construction companies, and would allow private companies, in some cases headquartered out of the country, to determine how much money Texas have to pay to drive.

Now, Governor Perry has spoken out on what he thinks of the public hearing process, and it’s not much.

“I happen to think that the great majority of people in the state of Texas who did not go to those hearings, want to see traffic moving, they want to see an end to congestion, and they want hazardous materials kept out of our cities,” Perry told 1200 WOAI news.

The purpose of the hearings was to solicit public input on the Trans Texas Corridor, but now Perry says the purpose was actually something else entirely.

“If anyone has a better plan, those hearings were the place to lay them out,” Perry said, adding that he didn’t hear any ‘better plans’ specified.

Perry says he remains fully committed to moving forward with the Trans Texas Corridor. The SR-130 Bypass currently under construction from Seguin to Georgetown may become a port of TTC-35, the Trans Texas Corridor route running from Sherman to Laredo.

Read our posts about the first SA hearing here and here.
Nearly 700 turned out to oppose the corridor in Seguin. Not one person spoke in favor. Of course, they didn’t cover our statement which addresses what the true source of congestion is on I-35: NAFTA trucks and the trade with China that’s projected to increase containers traveling through the U.S. from 100,000 to 700,000 by 2010. It’s not Texas truckers and it’s not commuters clogging I-35, it’s the foreign trade from NAFTA and CAFTA (neither of which Americans got to vote on) clogging Texas highways, and these urban toll roads are all feeders roads and revenue sources to make Texans bear the burden of the Nation’s commerce. Get rid of the trade agreements, and you get rid of the supposed “need” for the Trans Texas Corridor.

San Antonio Express-News.

Herald-Zeitung in New Braunfels.

Gazette-Enterprise in Seguin.

Our statement in Seguin:

The San Antonio Toll Party is part of a growing statewide grassroots movement to stop the Trans-Texas Corridor and the urban double tax tolls. Perry’s toll plans illustrate the total disconnect between the government and the grassroots who pay the bills. We NEED political reform. Carole Keeton Strayhorn, has made the best case through which the people of Texas can stop Rick Perry and this massive boondoggle, and that’s to institute the long-term solution of statewide Initiative & Referendum by giving Texans a vote to overturn this horrific toll road legislation.

San Antonio is ground zero for the special interest highway lobby including Zachry, which along with its majority partner Spanish company Cintra have paid over $7 billion for exclusive development rights for the corridor and are also one of two bidders to takeover the 281/1604 toll projects. This isn’t like opposition to the interstate system as they’d have us believe, the interstate system is already built (we don’t need two). It wasn’t a toll road, and it wasn’t 1/4 mile wide for the sole benefit of private interests…Eisenhower wanted it built for national security! This corridor threatens our security making our utilities and infrastructure a target especially when containers from China and Mexico won’t even be inspected until they reach the ports in San Antonio or Kansas City (read about it here)!

The planned route of the Corridor is slated to takeover parts of EXISTING I-35 and other existing roads, thus DOUBLE TAXING Texans for something we’ve already built and paid for.

It’s eminent domain abuse of the worst kind taking our land and handing it over to private interests for commercial gain. It’s the Supreme Court Kelo case wrapped up in a different colored bow.

The Governor’s Transportation Commission Chair Ric Williamson said this just two days ago when asked if all the universal opposition to the Trans Texas Corridor will stop the project, he answered, “The transportation needs of the state trump such opposition” (see it here). So whatever Perry and Williamson define as “transportation needs” is what rules the day. Apparently, we’re officially living under a Perry/Williamson dictatorship. We need a regime change and to stop special interest, elitist “we know best” politics.

Truth is, they haven’t justified the “need” for this corridor. It’s based on population growth not traffic projections, it doesn’t even factor in the rising price of gas and that people are actually driving less and congestion is going down. No one uses commuter rail outside populated areas, and truckers can scarcely fill their gas tanks much less afford toll roads. The real story is, they want this corridor to benefit foreign interests, mainly China, not Texas.

Recent news articles tell us the Port Authority of San Antonio has been working actively with the Communist Chinese to open and develop NAFTA shipping ports in Mexico that will enter the U.S. through the Trans Texas Corridor (or NAFTA superhighway) for the purpose of increasing its annual handling capacity from 100,000 containers to 700,000 containers initially, with possible expansion to two million containers by the end of the decade. That’s the congestion problem they’re seeking to solve, the source is not Texas truckers and commuters but the massive new influx of Chinese goods into the U.S. via Mexican ports, trucks, and rail (read more here).

It’s no accident that they planned the corridor to go through the path of least resistance, in rural areas, out of major media markets, with little political clout. But what they didn’t count on was the same opposition to their urban toll roads and they didn’t count on all of us banding together to unseat every last toller who thumbs their noses at the taxpayers starting with Rick Perry!

We urge you to join our statewide movement against the Corridor and double tax tolls by signing up at our tables outside before you leave. Join rural, urban and surburban Texans by not simply talking, but organizing. Our only vote on this is Nov. 7!

The political sparring has begun in the Gubernatorial race, and Chris Bell, in an effort to get noticed outside Houston, is taking pot shots at Grandma.

Strayhorn on toll roads and the Trans Texas Corridor:

Yes, Strayhorn has taken money from Zachry in the past, it’s no secret, it’s on our web site. Yes, she has stated, in the past, she thinks toll roads are a possible new source of transportation funding. However, that was for traditional toll roads, like Houston and Dallas that were completely new roads, the money stayed local, and the PEOPLE got to vote on bringing those projects to their cities. Once Perry and TxDOT’s version of tolling existing roads and handing our public infrastructure over to foreign companies became known, she not only didn’t support the idea, she’s been fighting to stop it alongside grassroots citizens ever since (more here). She’s also not taken money from Zachry since.

The Toll Party is not opposed to traditional toll roads either, when they’re completely NEW roads, the PEOPLE get to vote, the money stays local, the PUBLIC, not private foreign companies manage it, they don’t use gas taxes or other public funds or bonds creating DOUBLE TAXATION, and where there are no non-compete agreements that prevent the improvements and expansion of free lanes surrounding the toll roads.

She’s also been a stalwart advocate to wipe the Trans Texas Corridor off the books, and she promotes the only long-term solution to STOPPING this train wreck which is political reform through statewide initiative referendum. She wants to let the PEOPLE vote on this, unlike Perry and Bell. She is the ONLY Gubernatorial candidate who has attended the TTC hearings (more than a dozen). Where was Bell (or Kinky for that matter)? It’s real easy to jump on the bandwagon when candidates see a HUGE voting block that’s against Perry. All of them are vying for the “anti-toll,” “anti-corridor” vote, but we’re unashamed and wholeheartedly uniting behind the candidate who vows to give us a VOTE, reform the system, abolish the TTC and the urban toll road debacle, and who has the BEST chance of beating Perry, and that’s One Tough Grandma, Carole Keeton Strayhorn!

Bell’s flip flops on Trans Texas Corridor:

Today, talk radio erroneously repeated Bell’s claim that he was the only candidate against the Trans Texas Corridor. Here are his own words in support of the corridor, unedited, just months ago in the Dallas Morning News:

This question was asked and answered in February of 2006 in Dallas Morning News Voter Guide.
Q.: Are you satisfied with current plans for funding high-speed rail as an integral component of the Trans-Texas corridor? Please explain.
A: I think high-speed rail has an important place in our state’s long-term transportation plans, and I will support efforts to speed up the timetable for introducing high-speed rail here in Texas. Texas should not have to wait until 2025 to begin real development on the rail component of the TTC.
link: www.vgt2004.org/a-dallas06/candidate-detail.go?id=3170238

One Tough Grandma, Carole Keeton Strayhorn, received raucous applause and a standing ovation as she addressed the crowd at the Trans Texas Corridor hearing at East Central High School in San Antonio last night. The attendees were overwhelmingly opposed to the Trans Texas Corridor, with only a few members (3 or 4) of the business community, who represent highway interests not the public good, speaking in favor.

Considering this is ground zero for Zachry Construction and the highway lobby, the “pro-corridor” crowd was practically a no-show. I suspect their comments will all be submitted in the most cowardly way, written versus standing and facing the fellow citizens they plan to fleece. Strayhorn called these meetings exactly what they are…a dog and pony show not to gather public input, but to wear the public out with 54 hearings in 4 weeks, and making them wait 1 1/2 to 2 hours just to get a chance to speak. To make TxDOT look worse, they failed to plan for a facility adequate to hold the number of attendees and had to turn people away and schedule a second hearing Thursday (read previous entry about it here).

TxDOT employs its usual tactics to silence the Toll Party

I arrived just after 5 PM and was one of the first people to sign-up to speak on TxDOT’s list. When folks started getting up to speak who I KNEW had arrived well after me, I went over to the table to ask when I was slated to speak. They claimed they had no speaker card for me (even though I handed it to the woman personally) and then they put me on the list.

By the time I got a chance to speak, the crowd of 650 had dwindled to maybe 150. This has happened at enough meetings that I no longer believe this is coincidence or an accident. TxDOT is trying to silence our grassroots citizen voice by manipulating the speaker line-up to suppress the spokesperson from organizing more citizens against their toll plans by arming THE PEOPLE with information.

We will now have a hoard of witnesses evidence when and with whom I sign-up to speak. TxDOT is in violation of NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) if found to be in any way suppressing the solicitation of citizen comment as required by federal law. Yet another example of how this out of control bureaucracy MUST BE REINED IN. To the polls Nov. 7, folks. For TxDOT to get a new boss, we need a new Governor!

Here’s the Toll Party comments from last evening:

The San Antonio Toll Party is part of a growing statewide grassroots movement to stop the Trans-Texas Corridor and the urban double tax tolls. Rick Perry’s toll plans illustrate the total disconnect between the government and the grassroots who pay the bills. We need political reform. Carole Keeton Strayhorn, has made the best case through which the people of Texas can stop Rick Perry and this massive boondoggle, and institute the long-term solution of statewide Initiative & Referendum (initiativefortexas.org) by giving Texans a vote to overturn this horrific toll road legislation.

San Antonio is ground zero for the special interest highway lobby including Zachry, which along with its majority partner Spanish company Cintra have paid over $7 billion for exclusive development rights for the corridor and are also one of two bidders to takeover the 281/1604 toll projects. This same highway lobby is now running misleading radio ads claiming the corridor will help all of us get to spend more time with our loved ones. How does a superhighway through rural Texas help solve congestion in urban areas?

It also claims only private money and users of the road will pay for it, without raising taxes (how is a toll not a tax?), and how do they explain the low interest federal loans Cintra-Zachry is seeking at taxpayer expense (http://satollparty.com/post/?p=177)? The answer is, they can’t explain it in a way taxpayers will buy into it, so they choose to enlist in a propaganda campaign to mislead Texans into thinking foreign management of our infrastructure is the best thing since Texas Toast.

Our Concerns…
The planned route of the Corridor is slated to takeover parts of EXISTING I-35 from San Antonio to Laredo, thus DOUBLE TAXING Texans for something we’ve already built and paid for. (read it here).

The Corridor is all about transporting foreign goods throughout North America, undercutting our national sovereignty and our own production of goods. (See history of the trade agreements already signed by Bushhere and read this article by an economist who gets it here).

It turns control of PUBLIC highways over to foreign companies which means the highest possible tolls for our citizens and fails to be in the public’s best interest since they’re using these SECRET deals that grant monopolies over public infrastructure!

It’s eminent domain abuse of the worst kind taking our land and handing it over to private interests for commercial gain, and it doesn’t solve urban congestion as they claim.

It also takes economic assets away from Texas communities by re-routing the flow of trucks and limiting access to local services, lodging and attractions, similar to our objections of an elevated tollway on Bandera Rd.

The bottom line is we need to organize opposition in every town and city. We urge you to join our statewide movement against the Corridor and double tax tolls by signing up before you leave. Join rural, urban and surburban Texans who want to ramp up opposition by not simply talking, but organizing. Our only vote on this is Nov. 7!

David Stall of Corridor Watch was able to get this release out before I even arrived home from the hearing. He says it best, so read the gist of what happened below…

For Immediate Release
Corridor Watch.org
August 8, 2006

TxDOT FAILS TO ACCOMMODATE HUNDREDS AT SAN ANTONIO PUBLIC HEARING

SAN ANTONIO, TX – Hundreds of Texans were unable to attend and participate in the TTC-35 DEIS Public Hearing held in a San Antonio high school on August 8, 2006. When the East Central High School Cafeteria reached its 600-person capacity the doors were closed. Many of those left standing outside had driven great distances, some from as far away as Houston.

Apparently TxDOT didn’t realize that San Antonio is the 2nd most populated city in Texas. In fact the Alamo city is. And TxDOT might take note that it is also the 7th most populated city in the entire United States. Really something we would have expected them to have already known.

How did this happen? Was TxDOT unaware that metropolitan Bexar County’s population had grown to near 2 million? Did they really expect that a meeting room with a 600 person capacity would be adequate, especially given the vigorous debate over the TTC and toll projects in Bexar County?

This stands in stark contrast to Temple, population less than 55,000. When a stunning 1,600 people showed up for the TTC-35 DEIS Public Hearing in Temple, TxDOT needed only to add an additional 100 chairs to accommodate the crowd. And that wasn’t the only big turn out by Texans who want to let TxDOT know what they think about the TTC. Waco attracted more than 1,000 and 800 in Floresville, just a stones throw from San Antonio.

What were they thinking? Were they thinking? Some suspicious types might even suspect an evil plot designed to repel the throngs of unhappy citizens who are taking advantage of their right to express their unhappiness. Certainly people will give a second thought before drive to San Antonio if there’s a chance they’ll end up standing outside instead of listening and speaking inside.

CorridorWatch.org however is more inclined to suspect it was just horribly poor planning. The kind of planning we fear will be commonplace with the massive Trans Texas Corridor project that’s currently being designed in secret without coordination with regional transportation planners or meaningful citizen review and comment.

Of course, TxDOT will hold an additional Public Hearing in San Antonio in an attempt to reach those who were turned away. Will they move to a larger facility where everyone, even if there’s more than 600, can be assured that they can get inside the building? No they won’t.

The next San Antonio DEIS Tier One Public Hearing will be held on Thursday, August 10, 2006, again at the East Central High School cafeteria, 7173 FM 1628, San Antonio, Texas. The meeting room will open at 5:00 p.m. for open house style displays and discussion with a formal presentation beginning at 6:30 p.m., followed by oral comments from the public.

SUPPORTERS FAIL TO IMPRESS

Only three speakers in San Antonio were heard publicly addressing TxDOT in support of TTC-35. That was a surprise since a couple Pro-Toll Pro-Corridor organizations made a plea for their members and the public to testify for TTC-35. Their call for support even got some press coverage but didn’t seem to produce any results.

NOTE ADDED BY TERRI: In fact, the pro-corridor speakers were booed off the stage. They just grinned and took their seats. Yep, grinned…they think they sit high atop their untouchable, special interest ivory tower. Well, it’s about to get knocked down November 7!

Kudos to the Bulverde City Council for once again showing some backbone to TxDOT. The article below shows TxDOT’s position is unchanged, so the decision really didn’t need to be revisited. Their position toward the Council is: “Just give us the money, sit down, and muzzle it. Then go jump in Canyon Lake. You get NO SAY in this project.” Now we need to help the Council get the improvements needed on Hwy 46 in a way that’s in keeping with the Master Plan (maintaining the small town feel), increases safety, and that the public can trust.

Mr. Parker needs to consider that the same reasons TxDOT’s Malatek gives for why Hwy 46 cannot be tolled or become a truck route apply to 281. It, too, has topography challenges and multiple driveways loading onto the highway, and yet they found a way for trucks to traverse it just fine AND they’re tolling it (unless the citizens stop it). Never trust what a bureaucrat whose job depends on your cooperation tells you, especially when it’s not in writing and when another spokeswoman in this very article states the opposite to be true. TxDOT is not willing to work with the Council, period.

Texas 46 hits a roadblock
By Jessica Sanders
The Herald-Zeitung
August 9, 2006

A proposal to widen Texas 46 got a second look but not a second chance at Bulverde City Council’s meeting Tuesday night. With a 3 to 2 vote, the council narrowly rejected an agenda item to reconsider the Texas Department of Transportation’s proposed expansion.

Mayor Pro Tem Richard Parker and Councilwoman Pam Cole voted to reconsider the project. On July 25, the council rejected a proposal to expand Texas 46 from two to six lanes, but Parker asked that it be brought back to the agenda.

Councilwoman Robin Urbanovsky said she was not opposed to the improvements, but to TxDOT’s unwillingness to negotiate. The city had asked for changes, including six lanes instead of eight and removal of truck turn-arounds. “I want improvements to 46, but I do not want to be intimidated,” Urbanovsky said.

During the July 25 meeting, TxDOT area engineer Greg Malatek said the department would not guarantee that the city’s requests would be granted. He said TxDOT would build the road according to the department’s studies and specifications.

On Tuesday, a TxDOT spokeswoman said the department’s position had not changed. Parker, who first voted against the expansions July 25, said he asked that the item be reconsidered because of new information he had uncovered.

“One sticking point was the concern that 46 would become a truck and hazardous cargo route around San Antonio,” he said. “I did some investigations on my own and found that the topography of the road is not conducive to that, with two lanes or four.”

Also, Parker said he met with Malatek and was convinced that TxDOT would work with the city to meet their requests. Mayor Sarah Stevick said she would have asked for the item to be reconsidered if Parker had not.

She said he was deluged with phone calls from people who were upset after the expansions were rejected. However, only one resident spoke in favor of the expansions Tuesday night.

Resident Calvin Kempin said he believed the item was being reconsidered because of pressure by the county. Comal County and New Braunfels have already approved expansions east of the Sun Valley Drive intersection.

“Maybe you’re reconsidering because the county said, ‘you will reconsider,’” he told council. “TxDOT doesn’t want your input. They want your money.”

Resident and former Mayor Pro Tem Michael Sorbera said the city will pay more only if the project is put off. “Someday we’ll have to widen 46. We’ll have to,” he said. “Right now, we can have it done for a pittance. X years down the road it will only get more expensive, with the rising price of oil and construction.”

The expansions, as part of TxDOT’s deal with the county, would have cost Bulverde $790,000 over seven years. Stevick said it would have increased taxes by about 2.5 cents.

Councilman Mark Mobley, who was absent from the July 25 meeting, said the decision had already been made and should not be revisited.

“I don’t like to flip-flop on issues,” he said. “If there was some new data, I might be open to reconsidering.”