Category: General

TxDOT-sponsored freight study suggests Hwy 46 as alternate truck route to bypass San Antonio

Posted on by

DEADLINE FOR COMMENTS JULY 5. Send comments via email to: jhayes@dot.state.tx.us. Or fax comments to the attention of Jesse Hayes at TxDOT at (210) 615-6295.

Last week, TxDOT held a public meeting regarding the expansion of Hwy 46. Originally, at a meeting called by the City of Bulverde in April, the expansion was going to be widening 46 to 4 lanes in Bulverde and New Braunfels and adding passing lanes and left turn lanes where appropriate in between. At the June 20 TxDOT meeting, they’ve now expanded the project to a full SIX lanes from the Bulverde city limits on the west side all the way to FM 3159 then again through the New Braunfels portion. Not even US 281 has 6 lanes in Comal County and it carries far more traffic! Many people at the meeting expressed concern about the increasing number of 18 wheelers traveling on 46, along with stating a 6 lane expansion is overkill and will only encourage more truck traffic between I-10 and I-35 to bypass congestion in San Antonio.

Also, since that meeting, a supporter sent the following:
A study by the National Freight Corridor (see study here, then click on “public participation” for San Antonio) was conducted by the Department of Transportations in the 8 states through which I-10 travels. It clearly recommends TxDOT make Hwy 46 the preferred alternate truck route to Loop 1604, particularly for hazardous cargo. Hazardous cargo right through the beautiful Texas Hill Country? Loop 1604 has a ban on hazardous cargo due to the aquifer (as it should), but though much of 46 is also over the aquifer, this freight study of I-10 done in 2002 states that Hwy 46 should be the alternate route for such cargo for those who want to bypass San Antonio.

From the I-10 Freight Corridor Study Public Participation Section: (see it here)

-Marked increase in truck traffic going through area on I-10
-Increased truck traffic on SH 46 and development along that highway; studies show there is not sufficient capacity for truck traffic on SH 46; need to protect right of way for future expansion.
-San Antonio recently mandated a specific hazardous materials route though the city, which has encouraged more trucks to use SH 46. Consider a bypass route for hazardous materials trucks.
-There is a need for alternate truck traffic routes in San Antonio and nearby towns,
including possible relief routes around small towns. Through traffic needs to be pulled out of major metropolitan areas like San Antonio.

____________________________

The Transportation Commission meeting minutes from November 2005 (read transcript) show that TxDOT repeatedly refers to Hwy 46 as the “outer loop of San Antonio.” Is this why the project went from a 4 lane project at the meeting in Bulverde up to a 6 lane project at the New Braunfels meeting? Seems they may be trying to sneak these extra lanes into the project under the radar screen of those in the Spring Branch/Bulverde area. This is not what folks want barreling through their backyards. We don’t want to invite more congestion and especially not HAZARDOUS CARGO!

We have Transportation Commissioners that sit on these national and international corridor organizations. They see getting freight from I-10 to I-35, we see accidents, pollution, destruction of what’s left of Texas’ Hill Country beauty, lower property values, and lower quality of life. This could destroy the Hill Country as we know it. We can’t have the small town feel with a 6 lane truck route through it. What will this do to health and safety much less property values and tax revenues? We need to rethink this project and the overkill 6 lane expansion that’s proposed. Our elected officials as well as TxDOT need to be alerted to our concerns, and we need to work with them to start working on getting a hazardous cargo ban in Comal and Kendall counties, ASAP!

DEADLINE FOR COMMENTS JULY 5. Send comments via email to: jhayes@dot.state.tx.us. Or fax comments to the attention of Jesse Hayes at TxDOT at (210) 615-6295.

Feds Encourage Foreign Control of U.S. Interstates

Posted on by

Link to editorial here.

Feds Encourage Foreign Control of U.S. Interstates
By Diane M. Grassi
The Hawaii Reporter
6/27/2006

Fifty years ago, President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed into law the 1956 National Federal-Aid Highway Act and since 1990 referred to as the Dwight D. Eisenhower System of Interstate and Defense Highways. He authorized the connectivity of 41, 000 miles of high quality highways across the United States. It would be financed by a combination of the Highway Trust Fund, federally imposed user fees on motor fuels and state user fees.

Eisenhower was prompted to persuade the nation’s people to build the interstate system, as a matter of national security. Although not at war at the time, he believed it was imperative the interstate be designed for mass evacuation of cities in the event of a nuclear attack, in the era of the Cold War. The Act dictated that one out of every five miles must be straight, in order to use as airstrips in times of war or other catastrophic emergencies. And to that end, the success of national defense was dependent upon the navigability of large numbers of military personnel and their equipment during such a crisis. And even today, 75% of the interstate highway system represents the Strategic Highway Corridor Network (STAHNET) utilized by the U.S. military.

And while in 1956 there was the fear of nuclear threat from the then Soviet Union, today’s national security, often referred to as homeland security, remains similarly threatened in an era where the threat of terrorism looms. Yet, at such time that it would appear imperative that U.S. strategic infrastructure such as the interstate highway system remain under American control, it is but one more public asset available for sale under the guise of Public-Private Partnerships. Unlike domestic privatization, however, states throughout the country are negotiating contracts solely with foreign corporations and conglomerates, primarily in Europe, Australia and Asia, in order to finance the maintenance, modernizing and extension of U.S. interstates.

As funding from federal gas taxes and state user fees have fallen behind the inflated costs associated with road construction and maintenance, more and more state governors and lawmakers no longer see the operation of roads solely as a public responsibility. However, the reason states initially took over handling roads at the beginning of the 19th century was because many roads, bridges and canals had previously fallen to bankruptcy in the hands of private owners.

According to the Secretary of the Department of Transportation, Norman Mineta, “We are like a poker game. We are inviting people to the table and saying, ‘Bring money when you come.’” And Mineta believes, “A big part of the answer is to involve the private sector more fully – not just as a contractor or vendor, not merely as a financier, but as a partner in the funding, management and expansion of our transportation infrastructure.” Yet when those partners are exclusively foreign entities, a whole new dimension is added to the management of the U.S. interstate highway system. It is unprecedented.

The deal which started a flurry of more than 18 proposed foreign financed interstate highway projects across the nation over the past year in amounts of over $25 billion was in Chicago, IL in December 2004. Chicago Mayor Richard Daley proposed an agreement to lease the Chicago Skyway for $1.83 billion dollars to Cintra-Macquarie Consortium, a Spanish-Australian conglomerate, doing business as State Mobility Partners in the U.S. The deal, finalized in January 2005, gave Cintra-Maquarie a 99-year lease for which it is responsible for the maintenance and structural quality of the 8-mile elevated structure. -1- -2- In exchange for its upfront payment, Cintra-Macquarie will collect and keep all money from tolls from the Skyway and will be able to raise tolls as incorporated under the terms of the agreement. The company is modernizing toll collection with an electronic transponder system. Until the technology is fully operable, toll collectors have been newly but temporarily recruited. But instead of earning an average hourly wage of $20.00 as their predecessors did, they are paid a $10.00 to $12.00 hourly wage. And as contracted, the Skyway offers the buyer an asset without having to deal with improvements or debt.

Following the situation in Chicago, Indiana Governor and former Office of Management and Budget Director for President Bush in his first term, Mitch Daniels, explored a similar arrangement for Indiana’s $2.8 billion shortfall in its transportation budget over the next ten years. Daniels was able to get his highly contested proposal through the state legislature as well as the courts where it was challenged by a citizen advocacy organization.

A bid was accepted by the state of Indiana in the amount of $3.8 billion and an agreement was arrived at with Cintra-Macquarie, the same operator of the Chicago Skyway. The lease agreement will provide for the operation and maintenance of the 157-mile Indiana Toll Road, a part of the interstate highway system, for a period of 75 years. The deal is expected to close on June 30, 2006. The Indiana Toll Road will also have an upgraded electronic toll system installed, eventually ending the need for toll workers.

Here are just a few of the many other projects either approved or proposed across the country. In Virginia, the rights to manage, operate and maintain the Pocahontas Parkway, an 8.8-mile toll road outside of Richmond, were bought for $611 million by the Transburban Group, also an Australian entity in its first foray into U.S. road management. A lawmaker in New Jersey has proposed selling a 49% interest in the New Jersey Turnpike and Garden State Parkway to a private investor.

In August 2005, the same Macquarie Infrastructure Group took over operations of the Dulles Greenway Toll Road which operates between suburban Virginia and Washington, D.C., for the amount of $533 million. And the anticipated widening and extension of the Trans-Texas Corridor which runs 316 miles and parallel to I-35 in Texas, is slated to be built by Cintra, the Spanish company, and Zachry Construction, out of San Antonio, TX, who plan to invest $7.2 billion.

But windfall upfront payments while attractive to states to reinvest in other transportation projects, have their limitations and pitfalls too. States will need to learn how to enforce and write explicit contracts. And the proceeds from the sale or lease of roads should be earmarked for specific projects. Non-compete clauses are often inserted in such contracts such as inducing lower speed limits on parallel free roads to drive traffic to the toll road. Others fear that operators will only maintain those parts of the route which remain profitable.

Other issues which are arising more often after the fact is the increasing worry that the public will have less and less input over the use of its public assets. Such is the case in Colorado and California where the enforcement of maintenance matters have already become problematic. Immediate increases in tolls and applied on a perennial basis, with higher tolls applied at rush hours have not sat well with commuters.

However, questions will continue to arise in a process still in its in infancy. Yet states must have the ability to learn from mistakes made in doing business in this brand new way. Will a private firm maintain the roadways as well as the U.S. government? Will a foreign corporation care about the needs of the American people? And will selling off public assets to pay debts now be regrettable down the road? One would think that Eisenhower would have thought so.

Austin MPO running scared; delays vote on toll roads until after election!

Posted on by

Link to Austin-American Statesman article here.

This is beautiful! Reporter Ben Wear actually gives the Austin Toll Party credit (albeit veiled credit) for the defeat of several toll projects and the defeat of certain politicians on CAMPO. Eventually all politicians have to face the music, and when push comes to shove, they’d rather keep their jobs and do what the voters want than side with the special interests like the highway lobby at their own peril!

Vote on more toll roads delayed
Support for pay-to-drive plan may be eroding; decision not expected before fall elections.
By Ben Wear
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Wednesday, June 28, 2006

Transportation officials have postponed, probably until after the November elections, what is shaping up as a definitive vote on a second wave of toll roads for Central Texas.

And evidence is mounting that the vote could be a reversal, in part or in whole, of the 2004 and 2005 votes by the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization board to make the roads pay-to-drive.

The precipitating event in the delay is a recent change by federal highway officials in requirements for environmental analyses. That meant environmental reports on the five potential toll roads in the Phase II plan won’t be done for several months, erasing what appeared to be a July deadline for a CAMPO board vote.

But the underlying dynamic of the postponement is political. A growing number of the 23 board members — 21 are elected officials — want to wait for results of a study before making the politically ticklish vote. A $300,000 financial review by a Boston consulting company of the $1.4 billion project won’t be done until October or so.

“Once we get the study back, we’ll need to spend several months working through the results and figuring out where we go from here,” said Austin City Council Member Brewster McCracken, a CAMPO board member.

McCracken, who joined the majority in a 16-7 vote in July 2004 authorizing Phase began to have doubts months later and pushed for the study of the plan’s underlying assumptions and potential alternatives to tolls.

For months after McCracken’s change of heart, it seemed that support for the toll road plan was holding firm. But at the CAMPO meeting two weeks ago, Phase II skeptics appeared to have found their voice.

“A consensus has emerged in the community in the two years since this plan was presented to the board,” McCracken said Monday. “And the consensus is that it is OK to toll new roads but that we should not convert existing free highways into tollways.”

The Phase II plan does not consist of pure conversions, that is, simply erecting toll facilities on an existing road without making improvements. Rather, the plan involves building one road from scratch (Texas 45 Southwest) and building tolled express lanes with free frontage roads on four other highways that are interrupted by stoplights.

Two of the four roads in that second category, U.S. 183 (Ed Bluestein Boulevard) and Texas 71 East are already under construction. The other two are U.S. 290 East and U.S. 290/Texas 71 in Oak Hill.

All the Phase II roads have generated criticism, as did two others that were in the plan in 2004 but were jettisoned after massive, well-organized opposition. And toll roads have been a factor in the election defeats of CAMPO board members Karen Sonleitner, a Travis County commissioner, and former West Lake Mayor Dwight Thompson.

But state Rep. Mark Strama, D-Austin, a CAMPO member with a potentially tight re-election battle this fall, said the delay isn’t about avoiding a tough vote before the November elections.

“The politics of tolling have become so opaque to me that I’ve given up on trying to do the right thing politically on it,” Strama said. “I don’t want to procrastinate on this. We have to get it right from a policy perspective so we can defuse some of the tensions and antagonisms it has created. And I’m for getting it right as soon as possible.”

Strama nonetheless wants answers to some questions, such as why the plan assumes that only 15 percent of the construction money would be borrowed (with the rest coming from state and federal gas taxes) and how high a local-option gas tax (not currently allowed under state law) it would take to replace the lost toll revenue.

State Rep. Mike Krusee, R-Williamson County, the House transportation committee chairman and architect of the toll road plan, said it’s too early to conclude that Phase II is in trouble. The study, he said, is unlikely to be the political magic bullet CAMPO members are looking for.

“What I presume it will say is, ‘Is there any possible way to build these roads without tolling them?’ and the answer will be yes,” Krusee said. “And ‘are there serious consequences for the future of road building if we don’t toll?’ And the answer to that will also be yes. So you’ll still face the dilemma.

“When we do take that vote, I just want to make sure everyone understands the consequences of what we’re doing.”

Cintra-Zachry negotiate another secret toll deal for Hwy 130

Posted on by

Read Driscoll’s article with today’s developments here.

WOAI Radio report on the secret deal with comments from the Toll Party here.

Here’s the pro-toll version in Toll Road News.

Read this press release from Comptroller Carole Strayhorn in response to Perry’s “backroom” deals that benefit the few:

IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Wednesday, June 28, 2006

STRAYHORN RIPS ANOTHER SECRET TOLL ROAD DEAL

(AUSTIN) – Texas Independent Candidate for Governor Carole Keeton Strayhorn decried Gov Perry’s Texas Department of Transportation’s announcement today that it has apparently negotiated behind closed doors and come to another agreement with the same foreign company to build a 40-mile toll road.

“Texans still don’t know what is in the first contract between Gov. Perry’s TxDot and Cintra, the European-based company, in this $184 billion Trans Texas Catastrophe,” Strayhorn said. “And today we find out that the state has been secretly negotiating behind closed doors to let that same company build this 40-mile stretch of toll road.”

“The governor and Cintra and TxDot need to come clean, do their business in the sunshine, and stop turning Texas and our critical infrastructure over to a foreign company,” she said.

TxDot said it will sign an agreement with Cintra Zachary tomorrow to build the road between Austin and Seguin.

“The governor and TxDot – for over a year – are still defying the Attorney General who said the original contract must be made public. Now the governor lets them pop up and announce they are signing another contract worth more than a billion dollars,” Strayhorn said. “They truly are cramming toll roads down Texans throats before they even finish the public hearings.”

“This blatant disregard for the public’s right to know will come to a screeching halt when we change the leadership at the top of this state,” Strayhorn said. “I’m going to open up the system, let Texans have a real say in their future, and stop this Trans Texas Catastrophe.”

-30-

Loop 1604 Public Meeting: Citizen to TxDOT – "We ought to re-name this project 'bend over.'"

Posted on by

Link to article here.

Some of the best comments from citizens failed to make the story below. This article is far too tame to have really reflected the outright anger and outrage expressed by nearly all of the citizen comments. Out of more than 2 dozen speakers, only 4 spoke in favor of tolls and EVERY ONE OF THEM were business interests (one was even a contractor for TxDOT) or politicians in the hip pocket of the highway lobby. NOT ONE ORDINARY CITIZEN was in favor of tolls. The first two speakers were outstanding, setting the tone for the evening. Both told the citizens assembled that to stop toll roads, we need to get rid of Rick Perry. This was a theme from many of the speakers, but a fact overlooked in this article. The opening speaker, Mr. Piper, said we ought to rename this project “bend over.” The crowd erupted in raucous applause. This was again overlooked in this article. Not sure why a great line like that wouldn’t be the headline! It perfectly codified the sentiment of the evening. Councilman Richard Perez, chair of the MPO, and chief architect of blocking citizen efforts to stop the tolls at the MPO, and his pro-toll comments fell flat on a crowd in no mood to hear from politicians about how we HAVE to toll our freeways, though he was sure to say he’d never take a toll road. That’s a promise pretty easy for him to keep considering his southside district won’t have a single toll road while he continues to promote tolls and use his power at the MPO to install tolls all over the northside!

Now, as to developer Marty Wender’s comments. It borders on irresponsible journalism that no one reported Wender’s total hypocrisy to testify and promote tolls at this meeting as if he had drunk some pro-toll Kool-Aid when he had previously marched over to the Bexar County Commissioners Court in 2003 and demanded they REMOVE TOLLS from Hwy 151, which threatened to tank HIS OWN Westover Hills development (and personal PROFIT) on the west side. So Wender has no problem stabbing fellow businessmen who have the misfortune of being located along Loop 1604 in the back as long as TxDOT keeps tolls out of his own backyard! This sort of selfish cronyism and corruption will lead to a total revolution at the ballot box in November. Many speakers responded to Wender’s comments with total disgust, many taking offense to his cavalier attitude that “if you don’t want to pay tolls, then move closer to your job.” One speaker responded, “Not all of us have the luxury to be able to afford to live near where we work.” Why wasn’t this fact reported in the press?

Toll lane opponents call for alternatives at public meeting
Patrick Driscoll
Express-News Staff Writer
06/28/2006

North Side residents on Tuesday pleaded with state officials, threatened a backlash at the ballot box, asked for alternatives and even offered their own solutions.

Anything to stop the Texas Department of Transportation from tolling lanes that could be added to Loop 1604, from Texas 151 on the West Side to Interstate 10 on the East Side.

“If you hear anything tonight, please know that the citizens who speak here would like to have some options offered to them, and not the idea that this is a done deal,” Barry Booth said. “Please present some other alternatives rather than just private industry offering us a solution.”

More than 175 people attended a meeting at the Live Oak Civic Center to provide input on a proposal to build four to six toll lanes on Loop 1604. Four out of five of the two dozen speakers railed against tolls, and a handful of business and political leaders touted the need.

By tolling new lanes, construction could be funded a decade or more sooner to deal with growing traffic, and waiting for a gas-tax increase is politically futile, proponents say. Motorists will still have a choice because existing lanes will remain free, they say.

“No one’s going to make anybody go on the toll lanes,” said Marty Wender, a developer and past president of the Greater San Antonio Chamber of Commerce. “If we want a quality freeway system in this community that we have today and keep it going, our only choice today is toll roads.”

Drivers could pay about 14 to 16 cents a mile on Loop 1604 toll lanes, though a state survey last year tested attitudes about paying as much as double that, depending on times of day and whether people were sharing rides.

Critics say congestion relief will be available only to those who can afford to pay tolls and that everybody else will be stuck in gridlock. They suggest reversible lanes and use of shoulders during rush hours, variable speed limits and ramp metering as some ways to curb traffic.

“This is a an issue that really needs to be addressed in a different way,” said Victoria Paparelli, who said she had walked into the meeting favoring tolls on Loop 1604 until she heard other people speak. “We need the opportunity to say what we want.”

Another public meeting is scheduled from 6 to 10 p.m. today at the University of Texas at San Antonio’s Convocation Center.
_____________________________

Toll Party Comments at Loop 1604 Meeting:

We believe there are other more affordable ways to accelerate 1604 improvements than tolling. The original plan for 1604 was only to add two additional free lanes. Now the project calls for 4 additional lanes which requires them to bulldoze our existing freeway and rebuild it. It’s a total waste of taxpayer money. The toll plan, though being billed as speeding up the improvements, will actually be more costly, will take longer, be more invasive to build, less safe, more damaging to the environment, and increase the cost to motorists for using the highway from 1-3 cents on average per mile now (under gas tax system) to 29 cents per mile (per TxDOT’s own online survey conducted by Survey Cafe September 2005) for a net increase of over $2,500 per year per motorist for a 20 mile commute.

I’ll name just a few ways to truly solve congestion without tolls: tidal flow, variable speed limits, dynamic lanes, dedicated lanes, ramp metering, and hard shoulder running (see article here). There’s examples of accelerated projects in WA, CA, & Austin–one took a 10 month project and shortened it to 9 days and saved 25% of the construction cost (see examples within presentation to auto dealers here)! Toll roads don’t solve congestion; they manipulate it for profit. No toll road works if the lanes next to it are congestion free. Houston has 83 miles of toll roads, have toll roads solved Houston’s congestion problems? From now on, you aren’t going to get freeway improvements or congestion relief unless you have an extra $2,000-4,000 a year for tolls. The non-compete agreements in these toll contracts gives the toll operator control of the free lanes which actually prohibit any expansion or improvements to the surroundings roads within a certain mile radius of the toll road (read more here).

This new tax on driving will have a devastating economic effect on businesses and consumers alike reaping both direct and indirect cost increases (higher cost of goods), particularly businesses with fleets that use our highways multiple times per day for deliveries and home values in the affected corridor. It is a known fact that people change their behavior to avoid toll roads. This is a totally unnecessary new tax with damaging economic, social, and health impacts.

TxDOT’s own studies show that improvements can be paid for 100% with bonds, so there is no reason to toll Loop 1604. TxDOT is saying the options to the public are toll it or NO IMPROVEMENTS. They are not considering the less invasive, more affordable, and less damaging options. Everyone’s gas tax money and likely public bonds will be used to erect this toll project. So it’s a massive DOUBLE TAX scheme to charge us again for something we’ve already paid for.

They plan to sell a 50 year monopoly of this PUBLIC freeway to a FOREIGN company using a CDA agreement taking what belongs to Texans and giving control of it to a foreign entity for profit. This privatizing and management of our public infrastructure by foreign companies is dangerous and is tantamount to eminent domain abuse of the worst kind.

Go to www.SATollParty.com to sign our petition. Get informed, get involved!

Perry: "No state in the nation is laying as much asphalt as Texas"

Posted on by

“No state in the nation is laying as much asphalt as Texas,” said Rick Perry in a press release dated June 26 and published in the Texas Insider touting the rapid expansion of the Katy Freeway.

Laying the most asphalt is supposed to be something to be proud of? Perhaps the aggregate industry would cheer at such a statement, but how about the average Texan? This seems to demonstrate once again how out of touch our Governor is with ordinary, grassroots citizens. Compare this to Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison’s comments on Perry’s toll road plans for Texas: “The interstate system was conceived and built with Federal tax dollars, so tolling interstates amounts to double taxation…To allow unelected transportation officials to simply install a toll booth on facilities already paid for by Federal tax dollars is unacceptable.”

Read her entire floor speech May 10, 2005, here.

Yes, we want NEEDED highway infrastructure, but we don’t want to indiscriminately pave over Texas for unnecessarily large toll projects when much less was orginally planned and needed for these same highways. The original plan for US 281 called for 12 lanes at the widest parts, now as a tollway, 16 lanes, 6 of which will largely sit idle except during rush hour traffic. On Loop 1604, the original plan called for 2 extra lanes, now as a tollway 4 lanes. The Trans Texas Corridor is perhaps the most glaring example of paving Texas for a project 4 football fields wide and taking over 580,000 acres of private Texans’ land (read more here). Time Magazine called it a BIG, FAT, TEXAS boondoggle, it’s eminent domain abuse of the worst kind, and an OUTRAGE to all Texans outside the highway lobby!

Then there’s the controversial project where TxDOT can drum up tax dollars to build a road to one person’s private property who happens to have connections to Governor Perry (read about it here). Ferrell Davis is a lifetime member of the American Meat Goat Association and former Commissioner of Agriculture, Rick Perry knows the organization well. Davis was also a recipient of the 2001 Man of the Year in Texas Agriculture awarded by the Texas County Agricultural Agents Association. State Representative Rick Perry won the same award in 1990. Davis is also a personal friend of the President and Mrs. Bush (read it here).

It’s this sort of cronyism that rules the day at the Texas Department of Transportation and in the Governor’s office. Perry and his Transportation Commission Chairman Ric Williamson are determined to sell Texas to the highest bidder. Time to clean house!

Trans Texas Corridor & Mexican trucks

Posted on by

Link to article here.

THE NEW WORLD DISORDER
Mexican trucks to enter U.S. freely?
Bush administration refuses to answer WND’s questions
By Jerome R. Corsi
June 27, 2006

A U.S. government agency has begun a new audit to determine if the Bush administration has resolved inspection issues that would allow Mexican trucks to enter the U.S. freely.

David Barnes, a spokesman for the Office of Inspector General within the U.S. Department of Transportation confirmed to WND a new audit was begun in March 2006 on action by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.

Barnes said he could not speculate on the outcome of the new study or on whether FMCSA had made any progress working out on-site safety inspection requirements with Mexico.

Despite repeated calls, WND received no comment from the office of Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta.

The issue draws heightened significance in light of the North American Free Trade Agreement super-highway plans being developed by the Trans-Texas Corridor project. Next month, the Texas Department of Transportation plans to hold the final public hearings on the plan to build a super-highway up to four football fields wide, paralleling I-35, from the border with Mexico at Laredo, Texas, north to the Texas-Oklahoma border. The Texas DOT expects to have final federal approval by the summer of 2007, with construction of the first super-highway segment to begin shortly thereafter.

Also, as WND has reported, the Kansas City SmartPort plans to open a Mexican customs office as part of their “inland port” along I-35. A brochure on the website of the Kansas City SmartPort makes clear that the ultimate plan is to utilize deep-sea Mexican ports, such as Lazaro Cardenas, to unload containers from China and the Far East. The containers will then be brought into the U.S. by Mexican railroads and Mexican trucks, all headed north to Kansas City, where the containers could continue north or be routed east or west, as needed.

Since before the passage of NAFTA, a decision to allow Mexican trucks into the U.S. on a non-restricted basis has been hotly contested.

On June 7, 2004, the U.S. Supreme Court reached a unanimous decision in Department of Transportation v. Public Citizen, ruling that Mexican trucks under NAFTA could enter the U.S. freely, even if the Mexican trucks failed to meet environmental standards as set by state and federal law.

The decision effectively lifted a 1982 U.S. decision to ban Mexican trucks from U.S. roads, except for a 20-mile zone near the border. The ban had been kept in place by the Clinton administration, despite the passage of NAFTA in 1994, with provisions specifying that the Mexican truck moratorium would be lifted.

Still, thousands of Mexican trucks have not started rolling across the border yet. Why not?

The answer lies with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration in the Department of Transportation. According to Section 350 of the Fiscal Year 2002 DOT appropriations act, the FMCSA must first certify that Mexican trucks applying for cross-border entry into the U.S. are safe for long-haul operations.

An Office of Inspector General audit published Jan. 3, 2005, indicating the FMCSA had not implemented the on-site inspections in Mexico.

As of September 2004, FMCSA had received applications from 678 Mexican motor carriers seeking long-haul authority to operate about 4,000 vehicles. This was up from 232 carriers that had applied as of March 2003, seeking authority to operate about 1,400 long-haul vehicles.

“Still, the procedures for FMCSA to conduct on-site safety reviews have not been worked out with Mexico under the terms of NAFTA,” the January 3, 2005, OIG report noted.

Teamsters opposition

The Teamsters Union has fought NAFTA since the 1990s, concerned that the ultimate plan was to undermine union trucking as well as independent truckers who are owner-operators.

“With all the obstacles that still need to be overcome, our government must heed the OIG’s warnings from the January 2005 audit,” Galen Munroe, a spokesperson for the Teamsters Union told WND in an email. “The motor carriers in Mexico need to adhere to the same regulations and standards that our companies and drivers are subject to. Unfortunately, this seems to be a near impossible task with Mexico’s current infrastructure.”

The safety hazards being scrutinized by the FMCSA are in addition to ongoing environmental concerns. Commenting on the 2004 Supreme Court decision in Department of Transportation v. Public Citizen, legal analyst Noah Sachs noted the adverse consequences likely to follow this decision:

As a result of the ruling, thirty thousand or more Mexican trucks – which are generally older, more polluting, and less safe than their U.S. counterparts – will be allowed to conduct long haul trucking operations to locations across the United States. Recent government studies estimate that eighty to ninety percent of the Mexican truck fleet was manufactured before 1994. In a preliminary environmental review, FMCSA concluded that their emissions “can be expected to translate into incremental increases in premature deaths” and “an enhanced incidence of respiratory diseases” in the United States. A 2002 U.S. EPA study reported a “persuasive” link between inhalation of diesel exhaust and cancer.

Meanwhile, the last remaining barriers to the open entry of Mexican trucks into the U.S. seems to be finalizing procedures for on-site safety inspections in Mexico prior to authorizing Mexican truck operators for long-haul entry into the U.S.

The results of the March 2006 OIG audit will indicated whether FMSCA has made any progress resolving these issues with Mexico in the past year.

180 tramadolaffects of viagraxanax .50xanax fedex 2mg doctor4mg xanax6 7 dihydroxybergamottin tramadol andto addiction tramadolviagra of side adverse effects Map

TxDOT teams up with international group on Trans-Texas Corridor

Posted on by

Link to article here

TxDOT teams up with international group on Trans-Texas Corridor
Dallas Business Journal
January 18, 2006

In a rare endorsement, the Texas Department of Transportation is joining the North America’s Supercorridor Coalition Inc., a nonprofit, international organization based in Dallas.

The members of Nasco, founded in 1994, aim to develop the highway infrastructure from Canada through the United States to Mexico, particularly the Trans-Texas Corridor, which would widen and expand Interstate 35 into a mega-trade corridor.

A press release Wednesday from Nasco and TxDOT said the two will work together to ensure development of the TTC, championed by Gov. Rick Perry.

“The Texas Department of Transportation is formalizing its commitment to work closely with Nasco and its local, state and international members as the strongest voice on the continued development of I-35 and Trans-Texas Corridor 35,” said Ric Williamson, chairman of the Texas Transportation Commission.

“Without question, Nasco has been the single most influential organization, not just in Texas, but the nation, when it comes to the development of I-35,” Williamson added. “They also know what it will take to meet the challenges of the next 50 years.”

TxDOT will market the I-35 and Trans-Texas Corridor 35 with Nasco to state, national and international audiences, as well as work on common federal priorities, said Amadeo Saenz, TxDOT’s assistant executive director for engineering operations.

Saenz said Nasco’s leadership has helped TxDOT to understand how a broad transportation corridor benefits all sides.

Saenz and Nasco Executive Director Tiffany Melvin will make presentations on I-35 and TTC-35 at the Northeast Mexico-Texas workshop on logistics for regional competitiveness in Monterrey, Nuevo León, Mexico.

Nasco has memoranda of understanding with eight U.S. states and one Canadian province for ongoing cooperation in enhancing the I-35/I-29 and I-94 corridors and major connectors to those highways. Nasco also has signed a letter of intent with the Secretariat of Communications and Transportation of Mexico to develop a plan to monitor the operation of commercial cargo vehicles along I-35 using intelligent transportation systems.

The 20-member Nasco Board of Directors includes eight Texans representing Webb, Bell, Denton and Tarrant counties, Free Trade Alliance San Antonio, EWI Risk Services, the International Bank of Commerce and the international law firm Strasburger & Price.

Nasco’s general membership includes Lockheed Martin (NYSE: LMT), Hillwood Properties/Alliance Texas, Love’s Country Stores, the City of Midlothian, the City of Gainesville, GrowthNet Trading, and Franco Eleuteri & Associates.

Web sites: www.Nascocorridor.com and www.dot.state.tx.us

MPO votes unanimously to add high gas prices to attitudes and perception survey, but…

Posted on by

Link to Express-News article on vote here.

What does it tell you that even TxDOT voted for this? What the good guys tried to accomplish was to get a study that the MPO already conducts and has money allocated for expanded to include a study of high gas prices on the region’s transportation. The study only gauges attitudes and perceptions of driving and congestion, and we asked that the study’s scope be expanded to include a study of the financial and economic consequences of high gas prices, not just public perception. Only a study of real data and a hard look at the financials can actually tell them if the toll roads and other highway projects are justified financially in light of high and climbing gas prices. They did not vote to expand the study beyond asking people’s perceptions about high gas prices.

So this perceptions study was scheduled for mid-2007, and the good guys like Adkisson, Larson and our new hero on the MPO, Melissa Castro Killen of Via, tried to do was get that study moved up to fall of this year and get the scope expanded to include an actual study of the impact of high gas prices on transportation projects not just public perceptions of the gas prices. Well, Chairman Richard Perez stepped in to make sure that any study stayed in 2007 “because the high prices haven’t really changed people’s behavior yet” (really, that’s not what Alan Greenspan is saying, does Mr. Perez have data Alan Greenspan doesn’t?), and he called for a vote before anyone knew what hit ’em. The vote was unanimous, but they only gave us a sliver of what’s really needed to turn this train around.

Jim Reed of the Alamo RMA was spouting to the press that they see no reason at all to stop proceeding with toll roads based on the numbers. His “data” says no matter what happens, people will pay tolls to get to work faster. They’re living in a dreamworld if they think continued hikes in gas prices means people can just endlessly afford to pay MORE to get to work. They won’t even LOOK at other data that says otherwise. As long as their “highway lobby” financial analysts tell them people will pay tolls to get out of peak traffic, they don’t seem to care how that effects the larger economic picture, nor what other aspects of our quality of life and even the County’s tax base get effected.

Interim MPO Executive Director, Syd Martinez, even admitted people will cut back other discretionary spending to keep filling their tanks…yeah, because people don’t have a choice! They have to get around and they have to get to work. But this won’t last forever. How will this impact the City and County’s tax base if people make fewer trips to the store or to movies, or out to eat? Can they not see the forest for the trees? This will HURT THE ECONOMY, thus hurt employers’ ability to keep jobs and expanding their businesses, etc. It hurts all of us!

If Alan Greenspan says we’re headed for economic crisis and says the high gas prices are finally starting to hurt the economy, he doesn’t say this based on speculation and conjecture. He’s got real data telling him this. Seems we need to get a hold of such data.

The bottom line, the elitist pro-toll crowd thinks we’ll all keep ponying-up endless amounts of money to pay for the extra costs of transportation they wish to impose. The reality is you can’t squeeze blood from a turnip. There’s only so much money a family can give to transportation before we start completely altering our lifestyles. What are they waiting for, people having to choose between taking a toll road and feeding their families? C’mon! From what small business owners tell me and what especially healthcare workers keep telling their employers, they will no longer be able to work in Stone Oak if they add tolls to their already skyrocketing costs of gas. Is the MPO going to ignore all of this? People need other options, not just to be taxed to death and priced off our freeways!

With the help of friends on the Board, we’ll work to get that study date moved up and the scope expanded whether through another official vote of the Board or through the committee they’ll appoint to shape the scope of the study. This ain’t over, and ultimately we must take this fight to the ballot box in November!

MPO Board Voting Members Present:
Rep. Carlos Uresti
Commissioner Tommy Adkisson
Councilman Chip Haas
Councilman Richard Perez, Chair
Amy Madison, NE Partnership
Joe Aceves, Bexar County Info. Svcs
Al Notzen, Bexar County
Melissa Castro Killen, Via Board
Dr. Sydney Ordway, Via Board
Emil Moncivias, San Antonio City Planner
Syd Martinez, Interim Executive Director of MPO
David Casteel, District Engineer, TxDOT
Clay Smith, P.E., TxDOT

Elected officials not present:
Commissioner Chico Rodriguez, Precinct 1
Commissioner Lyle Larson, Precinct 3
Councilman Art Hall, District 8
Councilwoman Elena Guadjardo, District 7

Toll Party Statement to MPO
June 26, 2006

With gas at $3 a gallon throughout the state, it not only seems prudent, but absolutely necessary to study the impact of these high gas prices on the region’s transportation, particularly before you proceed with 73 miles of toll lanes. People will not have the discretionary income to pay tolls when gas is astronomically high, and we have every indication that it will remain high.

I have an article here from a New Jersey newspaper article just a few months back that says two of its turnpikes have lost revenue due to high gas prices, initially from Katrina, but the loss of revenue has continued now that we are now back to Katrina prices. Just the New Jersey turnpike alone lost $5 million last year! Do you think these private investors are going to invest billions in our toll system to see multi-million dollar losses continue due to high gas prices? It’s not only prudent, it’s vital to the economic stability of the region to study the affects of high gas prices on toll feasibility. An investment grade traffic & revenue study on Hwy 183 up in Austin found that toll roads aren’t feasible at $3 a gallon for gas. Another traffic & revenue study for Hwy 130 states similar concerns.

Gas prices have changed significantly since the MPO put 73 miles of toll roads in its plans. Gas prices are beginning to show their drain on the economy in the manufacturing industry, with new housing starts shrinking, and in the higher cost of goods. Even Alan Greenspan, former chief of the Federal Reserve, testified June 7 before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that “rising energy prices are pushing up inflation and increasingly threatening the U.S. economy.

“He called for speedily developing alternative energy sources such as ethanol and liquefied natural gas” and said “there won’t be a significant retreat for oil prices in coming years.”

San Antonio is listed in Forbes Magazine’s Top 10 cities hardest hit by high gas prices. It’s incumbent upon this body to take a step back and look at the larger economic and regional transportation picture. People are driving less, not more (see USA Today article). A CNN poll released just weeks ago showed that nearly 60% of respondents said gas prices are affecting their ability to maintain their standard of living.

People are turning to public transit now more than ever due to high gas prices only making car ownership continue to be out of reach for more San Antonians. San Antonio has one of the highest percentages of folks who cannot even afford to own a vehicle, and high gas prices and tolls will make it further out of reach. There needs to be more than just building ever wider and more expansive highway corridors in our region’s transportation picture. Let’s give folks a true choice in transportation….not simply having to choose between not getting around efficiently at all and paying the high cost of tolls.

Since San Antonians already have to drive 19% more than the average resident of other major cities, we need better planning including having a regional approach to transportation along with sensible development, especially boosting arterial connections (which also enhances public transit’s usability). Dave Pasley, former Planner for the City of San Antonio, mentions this in an editorial last December. It would be grossly irresponsible to proceed with building 73 miles of toll lanes (with more lanes being studied) when they’re not viable at $3 a gallon for gas while starving residents of other realistic and more comprehensive transportation solutions. People can’t pay what they don’t have money for. It’s not a fair assessment to say people don’t change their driving patterns to get to work due to high gas prices (as Mr. Martinez’ presentation suggests). Just gauging the public’s attitudes and perceptions doesn’t go far enough.

There is real data, hard data that paints a different picture than the one MPO Executive Director Martinez tried to paint. Traffic & revenue studies, bond investors, showed toll roads in Austin are not feasible at $3 a gallon. That’s not perception, that’s hard data. We encourage you to expand the scope of the study to ensure you look beyond attitudes and perceptions to the real financial data telling you the sustainability and feasibility of your MPO plan.

Rep. David Leibowitz asks this Board to support this study. Thousands of San Antonians stand with me in asking you to VOTE YES on a study of the impact of high gas prices on our region’s transportation.

Washington Mutual wants ALL taxpayers to foot the bill for their expansion!

Posted on by

Link to article here.

Haven’t we had enough of developers and big business skirting out of paying for the infrastructure their expansion brings? Here’s a fresh example from Washington Mutual who is essentially threatening the city to NOT add jobs if they don’t agree to make ALL taxpayers pick-up the tab for a road expansion to benefit a private company. None of us mind pooling our taxes together to build and maintain needed infrastructure for the general public benefit, but not to suit a private company’s desire to expand its facility on the taxpayers’ dime. Let’s not forget the multi-million dollar tax subsidies Washington Mutual has already enjoyed. They just want more. Enough is never enough for these companies unless we, the TAXPAYERS, tell them NO MORE! See some great analysis from Transportation Consultant and Toll Party supporter, Bill Barker, below this article.

WaMu says road critical to expansion
By William Pack
Express-News Business Writer
06/24/2006

Washington Mutual hopes to decide by the end of the year whether a fourth building and potentially 2,500 people can be added to its North San Antonio campus, the thrift’s executive vice president said Friday.

J. Benson Porter, who is also Washington Mutual’s chief administrative officer, said the company has been pleased by the growth of the regional center off Stone Oak Parkway in its first nine months of operations and is studying expansion options that would add a fourth building to the site.

Several factors will be part of an expansion decision, but the primary issue concerns the public’s support for a multimillion-dollar extension of Marshall Road.

The extension would give employees additional access to U.S. 281, east of the campus. Without that access, Washington Mutual has said the campus would not be able to expand beyond its current employment capacity — about 2,500 employees.

“I can say that future expansion plans are contingent upon Marshall Road being extended,” Porter said.

He and Andy Robinson, the campus operations officer, said the company has been in talks about the extension with city and county officials, as well as nearby property owners.

Porter wouldn’t predict how close the city and county are to a decision, but said he hopes to know more by the end of the year.

City officials could not be reached for comment about their discussions with the banking giant, but County Judge Nelson Wolff acknowledged that the county is trying to keep an open mind about participating in the road project.

He said it all depends on the cost of the extension and how much of the costs each party would be asked to shoulder. The city and county normally depend on developers to build roads into their property, but Wolff said Washington Mutual’s economic impact on the city has kept public officials open to participating.

His son, City Councilman Kevin Wolff, represents the district where the campus is located. He has estimated the extension will cost $3 million to $4 million.

Washington Mutual said earlier this year that employment at the campus could jump to 5,000 people if the facility is expanded.
________________________________

By Bill Barker

This building complex over the recharge zone off of US 281 was originally built by the now defunct WorldCom four miles from the nearest bus route. The site has no pedestrian entrance from the adjacent arterial road Stone Oak Parkway. Yet, WorldCom applied pressure to VIA to extend its bus service by four miles (a long distance for a bus system that goes out about 10 miles from downtown) to the building complex because they discovered that they were having a hard time attracting employees for their many low-paying telephone bank and clerical jobs. Of course, WorldCom expected VIA to pay for this. It is not clear how a bus patron was to get into and out of WordCom from the nearest street (Stone Oak Parkway).

When Washington Mutual took over the empty WorldCom complex, they wanted the government to build an exclusive on/off ramp from US 281. They expected TxDOT to pay for the ramp. Meanwhile, the San Antonio Mobility Coalition pointed to the Washington Mutual move into the empty WorldCom complex as an example of the economic development brought about by highways and a need for expansion of US 281.

Now Washington Mutual wants local governments to expand Marshall Road to try to fix the inherent transportation access problems with this poorly located and planned facility. Expansion of WaMu at this location would worsen the threat to the aquifer and the congestion on US 281. WaMu should plan to expand with another facility nearer to where its workforce lives, there are adequate transportation facilities/services and at a location that does not threaten everyone’s water. WaMu will find it increasingly difficult to recruit employees as the price of gasoline continues to rise, TxDOT continues to pursue tolls on US 281, and WaMu employees have few transportation choices.