Wolff: Toll Opponents "Crazy," "Dangerous"

Posted on October 25, 2007 by Terri Hall

Link to story here. The pro-tollers have come unhinged! Look who can’t win on the arguments and feels the need to drag a political debate into the mud and muck with name calling…Bexar County Judge Nelson Wolff. First, we’re called PIGS now “crazy” and “dangerous.”

Here’s what’s crazy:
-Charging us over and over again for what’s already built and paid for.
-Taking our gas tax plan for overpasses on 281 that’s been funded since 2003 and turning it into a cash cow, targeted, DOUBLE tax toll scheme.
-The Legislature stealing $10 billion from our gas taxes and later saying there’s no money for roads.
-Twice passing a Bexar County Commissioners Court Resolution AGAINST TOLLING EXISTING ROADS and then allowing them to toll existing corridors all over Bexar County.
-Exploding the cost of transportation at a time with record high gas prices which will further hurt the economy and the County’s sales tax and property tax base.

Here’s what’s dangerous:
-Throwing up stop lights, orange cones, and cement barriers all over the county causing hazardous road conditions, delays, and accidents.
-Allowing continued development in Northern Bexar County without keeping up with road capacity which ensured the intersection of 281 and 1604 would sit atop the city’s “Top 10 Crash Locations” list, where it has stayed since 2004.
-Refusing to install the overpass at a DANGEROUS intersection, 281/Borgfeld, where people have DIED when they’ve had the money to do it since 2003!

Apparently our elected officials are finally taking notice of the public outcry, but it’s clear they haven’t gotten the message. We don’t want or need toll roads…stop raiding our gas taxes, stop spending our money on illegal ad campaigns and hidden cameras in orange barrels, install the overpasses that are already paid for, index the gas tax, and be done with it.

Wolff: Toll Opponents “Crazy,” “Dangerous”
Judge rips into toll critics in ‘State of the County’ speech
By Jim Forsyth, WOAI
October 25, 2007

Bexar County Judge Nelson W. Wolff used his State of the County address today to tear into opponents of toll roads in Bexar County, saying they are ‘crazy’ and ‘dangerous’ and suggesting once that if he ‘named the other members of Commissioner’s Court who support toll roads it might endanger their lives.’

Wolff said toll roads are ‘the right way,’ and he urged the Chamber of Commerce audience to cheer Metropolitan Planning Organization Chair Sheila McNeil, who was sued along with the MPO this week by toll road opponents who claim that the organization is illegally pushing for toll roads.

“We have some people who have had to take a lot of heat,” Wolff said. “One of them is Sheila McNeil who is the head of the MPO. Sheila, stand up. We owe you a round of applause for taking the heat from these crazy people who are jamming it down your throat every day!”

Wolff has been a long time supporter of toll roads, and he has mentioned the importance of building toll roads in his previous two State of the County speeches. But the vehemence of his denunciation of toll road opponents surprised some in his generally pro toll audience. Wolff didn’t mention by name which toll road opponents he thinks are ‘crazy’ or ‘dangerous’ but he did cite an incident following a meeting to discuss toll roads.

“We had an incident not too long ago, where the anti toll road people were here and sort of jumped (Regional Mobility Authority Chairman) Bill Thornton and I in the parking lot. I tried to get away from him and he kept following me. I finally turned around and asked him to get away from me, and he said ‘give me your best shot.’ I called the deputy across the street, and he came over and kept him away from me. Let me tell you, they are dangerous people.”

“We’re barely holding on with a three two vote on Commissioners Court supporting this project,” Wolff said. “I won’t tell you who the other two commissioners are, I don’t want to endanger their lives.”

Lyle Larson and Tommy Adkisson are toll road opponents on Commissioner’s Court.

Then, Wolff suggested that residents should be grateful that toll roads are being built.

“The roads on the side will be free, the toll lanes will be in the middle, you don’t have to get onto the toll lane, you should be happy we’re building it, because there will be less traffic on the free lanes.”

Wolff said he opposes any concessions agreement which would allow “a company from ” to build the toll roads, a reference to the Cintra-Zachry partnership which has the contract to build 40 miles of the State Highway 130 toll road.

“TexDOT wants to give it (the US 281 toll lane construction contract) to a company from Spain,” Wolff said. “We prefer that the public be involved. We need to stick with the public sector, we need to keep the tolls as low as possible, and allow that money to stay right here and not go someplace else, whether it be or someplace else in

Elsewhere in his State of the County speech, Wolff said he anticipates suggestions on an estimated $300 million dollar venue tax renewal proposal to be submitted to Commissioners Court by December, and a vote could be called on the issue next spring. He says officials are considering four potential uses for the venue tax money. Sports complexes, including facilities at UTSA, which could be built inside the existing Municipal Auditorium, expansion of the Riverwalk south and north, and improvements to the AT&T Center.

Lawsuit against MPO makes front page, top of the fold!

Posted on October 23, 2007 by Terri Hall

Link to article here. FYI, the 281 lawsuit filed in federal court in December of 2005 required a new environmental study, but NOTHING prevents TxDOT from moving forward with the FREEway improvements to 281. It only stopped the TOLLWAY! The blame for any cost escalations rest solely on TxDOT and the politicians who enable them. We’ve done everything humanly possible to force TxDOT to revert back to the gas tax plan (like this MPO vote in January 2007) and get the fix installed years ago!

Tollway foes suing again
By Patrick Driscoll
Express-News
10/23/2007
With a U.S. 281 tollway plan racing toward the finish line, critics Monday filed yet another lawsuit they hope will slam on the brakes.

This time, they went to a federal court in San Antonio and reached back to the First and 14th amendments of the Constitution, which protect freedom of speech and provide equal protection under the law.

The lawsuit seeks to remove non-elected officials from the Metropolitan Planning Organization board and to ban Sheila McNeil, a city councilwoman who serves as chairwoman, from squelching some discussions on toll issues.

“The people of Texas are fed up with out-of-control, abusive government,” said Terri Hall of Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom. “This is taxation without representation.”

Planning organization Director Isidro Martinez said federal law dealing with local oversight of transportation funds calls for staff officials from major agencies as well as elected leaders to serve on such boards.

Eleven of the 19 members of the planning board have been elected to city councils, the Bexar County Commissioners Court and the Legislature.

“It’s just the way we’ve always done it,” he said. “I guess we’ll just have to wait and see.”

McNeil said it’s disappointing that no one first tried to resolve differences with her.

“Whoever’s filing a lawsuit has not come to me and asked me to reconsider or do anything,” she said. “It’s a waste of court time.”

Board member David Leibowitz, a state representative, said McNeil has repeatedly blocked consideration of a resolution that would advise the Texas Department of Transportation to stop spending up to $9 million to promote toll roads.

McNeil put the resolution on last month’s agenda but, she said, pulled it after reading it. She said an unwritten policy lets the chairwoman set the agendas.

“It got inadvertently put on the agenda,” she told the board last month. “It is not a matter for this MPO. We’re a planning organization. We don’t tell other organizations or entities how to spend their money.”

The maneuver was just the latest to spark the lawsuit, Hall said. Others include a split vote in July to push aside a toll critic and install McNeil as chairwoman, and a sudden policy change in May to try to keep a toll advocate on the board despite leaving elected office.

San Antonio has four council members on the board, more than any other entity. The city also has two staff officials who serve, and they typically vote with their bosses.

“We’ve done everything in our power to exert the political pressure to change this unconstitutional board,” Hall said. “But when a powerful unelected voting bloc is allowed to persist unchecked, we have no choice but go to court.”

The lawsuit’s lead attorney, David Van Os, who last year ran as the Democratic candidate for state attorney general, said he’ll ask for a hearing before the planning board meets Dec. 3.

In December, the board plans to set U.S. 281 toll rates and shift more public money to subsidize the toll road, from $69 million allocated now to $112 million. With the extra funds, the Alamo Regional Mobility Authority could build 8 miles of tollway instead of 4.

The mobility authority hopes to start construction next summer and open the toll road in 2012, with express lanes running from Loop 1604 to either Marshall Road or Comal County. Toll rates might start at 17 cents a mile for cars and rise 2.75 percent a year through 2017 and then 3 percent annually.

But that’s if the project doesn’t get shoved into a legal ditch. A 2005 lawsuit filed in a state district court forced more environmental study, which stopped work for more than two years. Construction costs have since gone up by a third.

TURF sues SAMPO for unconstitutional composition & actions

Posted on October 22, 2007 by Terri Hall

IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: David Van Os, Attorney at Law representing TURF, (210) 821-1700

View press conference on You Tube here.

TURF to sue transportation board for equal protection

MPO Board composition violates First and 14th Amendments to U.S. Constitution

San Antonio, TX, Monday, October 22, 2007 – In what could change the way toll roads are decided and approved in Bexar County, TURF filed a NEW lawsuit in FEDERAL COURT to put the power over transportation decisions back in the hands of the PEOPLE. TURF recently scored a victory in STATE COURT in a different lawsuit (read it here) against members of the Texas Transportation Department and Transportation Commission.

A lawsuit has been brought against the San Antonio Metropolitan Planning Organization (SAMPO) Transportation Policy Board that allocates tax dollars to transportation projects and approves toll rates and toll projects and San Antonio Councilwoman and MPO Chair Sheila McNeil. The lawsuit alleges that the composition of the SAMPO Board is unconstitutional and Chairwoman McNeil has been a party to denying the First Amendment right of free speech to the constituents of elected MPO Board members like State Representative David Leibowitz by blocking an agenda item and any debate on an issue brought up at his request. This novel lawsuit cuts to the heart of how toll roads are approved.

It’s based upon the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, 28 U.S.C. §1331, and 28 U.S.C. §§1343(3) and (4). The section of the post-Civil War civil rights enactments codified as 42 U.S.C. §1983 provides the Plaintiff’s enabling cause of action. A faction of governmental officials with the help of unelected board members have shut citizens and voters who oppose toll roads out of equal participation in the political process. The case will also argue that actions like Chairwoman McNeil’s removal of an agenda item asking for the funds TxDOT is spending on the Keep Texas Moving ad campaign be returned to building roads.

By way of recent example, in a SAMPO Transportation Policy Board meeting of September 24, 2007, Defendant McNeil, using the badge of authority of Chairmanship of the Board, arbitrarily removed from the meeting agenda a motion by State Representative and MPO Board member David Leibowitz calling for SAMPO to object to certain expenditures of public money by TXDOT promoting toll roads, which expenditures Representative Leibowitz believed to be inappropriate.

Defendant McNeil, acting under color of law, removed Representative Leibowitz’s motion from the meeting agenda even though Representative Leibowitz had properly and legitimately placed it on the meeting agenda and SAMPO had included it in the public posting of the agenda pursuant to the Texas Open Meetings Act. Defendant McNeil, acting under color of law, refused to permit Representative Leibowitz to present his motion because of her disfavor of his attempt to provide a voice for his constituents who oppose turning free public highways into toll roads.

TURF will be asking for both a temporary and permanent injunction to suspend ALL activities of the MPO until the case is decided and the Board’s composition is changed to reflect proper Constitutional representation allowing equal protection under the law per the 14th Amendment.

The unconstitutional MPO has blocked agenda items, voted against an independent review of toll plans that would bring accountability to the gross misuse of taxpayer money in these toll plans, voted against restoring the gas tax funded overpasses on 281 (281 in particular DOES NOT NEED TO BE TOLLED, what’s needed are overpasses and they’ve been paid for since 2003, the money is STILL there, they could do it tomorrow, but this un-Constitutional Board persists in preventing the simple solution that’s already paid for!

The MPO Board has also delayed votes, blocked the succession of the next Chair, and changed the bylaws to allow yet more illegal representation on the Board.

“The people of Texas are FED-UP with out-of-control abusive government. We’ve done everything in our power to exert the political pressure to change this unconstitutional Board, but when the deck is stacked and a powerful unelected voting block is allowed to persist unchecked, we have no choice but go to court to address our grievances. This is taxation without representation and we cannot and will not allow it to continue,” says Terri Hall, Founder and Director of TURF.

For a history of the efforts of the pro-toll faction blocking citizens from equal representation:
Click here and scroll to bottom for links to each action.

Chairwoman McNeil strips agenda item requested by State Representative David Leibowitz on expenditures for toll roads (click here.)

-30-

TURF sues SAMPO for unconstitutional composition & actions

Posted on October 22, 2007 by Terri Hall

IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: David Van Os, Attorney at Law representing TURF, (210) 821-1700

View press conference on You Tube here.

TURF to sue transportation board for equal protection

MPO Board composition violates First and 14th Amendments to U.S. Constitution

The MPO Board has also delayed votes, blocked the succession of the next Chair, and changed the bylaws to allow yet more illegal representation on the Board.

For a history of the efforts of the pro-toll faction blocking citizens from equal representation:
Click here and scroll to bottom for links to each action.

Chairwoman McNeil strips agenda item requested by State Representative David Leibowitz on expenditures for toll roads (click here.)

-30-

TxDOT to lower speed on I-35 to force more traffic on SH 130 TOLL ROAD

Posted on October 19, 2007 by Terri Hall

Link to article here. And who will get this toll revenue? Cintra, a Spanish company, and its minority partner, Zachry. So a PUBLIC agency is expressly manipulating our interstate speeds to line the pockets of a private, foreign company!

Texas: Speed Limit May be Lowered to Boost Toll Revenue
Toll road contract in Texas allows state to lower speed limits on nearby interstate freeway to avoid paying penalties to a private company.
October 19, 2007

SH130 route map The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) has agreed to consider lowering the maximum speed limit on a stretch of interstate highway that competes with a planned toll road. Cintra-Zachary, a joint Spanish-US venture, paid TxDOT $1.3 billion for the right to collect tolls on 40-miles of State Highway 130 set for construction beginning in 2009. Although TxDOT suggested that free market competition was part of the goal of using a public-private partnerships to construct and operate roads, the contract it signed on March 22 to construct this portion of SH130 was specifically designed to limit the desirability of alternate, free routes.

“The compensation amount owing from TxDOT to Developer on account of the competing facility shall be equal to the loss of toll revenues, if any, attributable to the competing facility,” the contract states. (11.3.2.1)

The provision ensures no improvements can be made to nearby roads unless the agency issues payment to the Spanish-US private consortium with taxpayer funds. TxDOT can reduce the amount of compensation owed, however, if it agrees to increase toll revenue by imposing a “decrease in the maximum daytime posted speed limit for passenger vehicles on all or a substantial portion of I-35 where it runs generally parallel to the Facility.” This means that TxDOT can recover money generated by additional tolls as motorists abandon I-35 because of the lowered limit and increased congestion.

The net effect of the clause is to dissuade, without prohibiting, any improvements on competing roads. TxDOT has argued that it is strapped for cash and therefore has no alternative but to turn to private sector tolling to fund new roads. Future improvements to free lanes would become less likely when the agency must pay not only the cost of labor and materials, but a compensation to nearby toll road operators as well.

In the past, so-called “non-compete” language in tolling contracts resulted in a blanket prohibition on the construction of new roads or engineering improvements intended to ease congestion. Non-compete clauses raised public anger in the case of the SR91 Express Lanes in Orange County, California. More recent agreements have tended to focus on introducing “traffic calming” measures on competing roads intended to drive traffic off of pay roads and onto toll roads, as was seen last year in Sydney, Australia’s Cross City Tunnel (view parliamentary report on the tunnel).

TxDOT has also reserved the right to add contract language that would limit improvements to free roads near the planned Trans Texas Corridor toll road.

“The foregoing rights shall be subject to any covenant regarding competing facilities that may be entered into in connection with the development and operation of a Facility,” the agency’s TTC-35 Comprehensive Development Agreement states. (18.2)

Excerpts from the competition portion of the SH130 contract are available in a 351k PDF file at the source link below.

Source: Facility Concession Agreement, SH130 Segments 5 and 6 (Texas Department of Transportation, 3/22/2007)

Only 60% of federal gas taxes go to roads…

Posted on October 19, 2007 by Terri Hall

Repairing Bridges without Raising Gas Taxes
By Heidi Sommer and H. Sterling Burnett
NCPA
Published: 10-18-07

In the wake of the August 1, 2007, Minneapolis bridge collapse, Rep. Jim Oberstar (D-Minn.), chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, proposed a 5-cents-per-gallon increase in the federal excise tax on gasoline.

Oberstar believes the hike would raise $25 billion over three years for critical bridge repairs across the United States. But his proposal flies in the face of growing public concern over sustained high gas prices. For instance, a 2006 CNN–ABC News poll found that 70 percent of respondents felt that gasoline price hikes had caused them personal hardship, and 59 percent believed gas prices had reduced their standard of living.

While there are legitimate concerns about the safety of the nation’s infrastructure, increasing the federal gas tax is unnecessary and will ultimately hurt America’s poor and low-income citizens. Fortunately, Congress can better ensure the soundness of the nation’s bridges and overpasses without raising taxes, simply by shifting existing funds within the transportation budget.Current Gas Taxes. The gas tax is an excise tax. Like the taxes on cigarettes and beer, it is paid only by those who purchase the product. The 1956 Federal-Aid Highway Act established the Highway Trust Fund and stipulated that 100 percent of the gas tax be deposited into this fund. The trust fund financed highway building and maintenance across the nation. Currently:

• The federal government imposes a gasoline tax of 18.4 cents per gallon.
• States levy additional gas taxes at rates ranging from a low of 8 cents per gallon in Alaska to a high of 44.4 cents per gallon in California.
• Combined federal and state gas taxes now average about 45 cents per gallon.
However, a substantial portion of the federal gas tax is diverted to nonhighway projects.

Who Pays the Gas Tax? Proponents of the tax increase insist that the hike would be barely noticeable. But the reality is that a 5-cents-per-gallon jump would cost American motorists an estimated $25 billion over the next three years. With this tax increase, most motorists would pay more than $7.50 in taxes alone for an average fill-up.A recent study by the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago reported that households in the top one- fourth of earners devoted 3.3 percent of their total income to gasoline, while households in the bottom quarter spent 3.8 percent. The same study found that families earning $24,000 per year spent almost 5 percent of their income on gas, while families earning $132,000 per year spent less than 2 percent. Thus, a gas tax hike would have the most dramatic effect on the working poor, who spend a higher proportion of their income on gasoline than any other group.

Diverting Gas Taxes. According to the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), 12 percent of the 597,340 bridges in the United States are structurally deficient — requiring significant maintenance, rehabilitation or replacement.

Despite past debate on the poor condition of the nation’s bridges, the situation was largely ignored before the recent Minneapolis bridge collapse. As they have for decades, Congress diverted Highway Trust Fund dollars away from potentially life-saving construction and repair to pork-barrel and earmarked projects. Earmarks are projects requested by individual members of Congress for their constituencies. The majority of these bypass normal state and federal review and selection processes. Although labeled “high-priority,” these projects only benefit certain constituent groups; the rest of the country would likely prefer funding for more immediate needs.

For instance, the 2005 highway bill contained $2 billion annually for bridge reconstruction. The House Transportation Committee considered increasing that figure to $3 billion a year, but instead Congress stuffed the bill with nearly 6,500 pork-barrel projects costing more than $24 billion. This is about the same amount Rep. Oberstar’s proposed tax increase would raise. “High-priority” transportation projects in the 2005 legislation included:

• $315 million for the infamous “Bridge to Nowhere” intended to replace a 7-minute ferry ride to the Ketchikan Airport in Alaska;
• $5 million to improve air quality in the Sacramento region of California;
• $4 million for bike paths and public parks near New River in Calexico, Calif.; and
• $4 million for streetscape, pedestrian improvements in Clarkson, Ga.The 2008 transportation appropriations bill seems likely to continue this trend, with more than $2.2 billion in earmarks. Indeed, many billions of dollars have been diverted from highway funding to other programs. As the figure shows, according to Transportation Secretary Mary Peters:

• Only 60 percent of federal gas taxes goes to the construction and maintenance of highways and bridges.

• Thirty percent goes to subsidize construction and maintenance of public transit facilities, such as bus terminals, light rail and subway systems.

• The remaining 10 percent is diverted to other projects — currently 6,000 projects — including bike paths, museums, nature trails, historic building repairs and so forth.

This is especially unfortunate since passenger rail lines, for instance, cost two-and-one-half to five times as much per mile to construct as a highway, though the only rail line in the nation that carries as much passenger traffic as a single lane of freeway is in New York City, and only six urban rail lines in the country carry as much as 3 percent of all travelers in the area they serve.“Only 60 percent of federal gas taxes are spent on highways.”

Despite these facts, Rep. Oberstar told the Rochester Post-Bulletin, “If you’re not prepared to invest another five cents in bridge reconstruction and road reconstruction, then God help you.” Ironically, Oberstar recently boasted that he had “secured more than $12 million in funding” for his state in a recent federal transportation and housing bill, none of which went for bridge repair. Instead, the funding Obserstar secured included $10 million for a commuter rail line, $250,000 for a bike and hike trail, $200,000 for bus services in Duluth and $150,000 for the Mesabi Academy of Kidspeace in Buhl.

Conclusion. Fifty years ago, the federal government played an important role in creating a national transportation system. The federal gasoline tax financed this effort, ensuring that drivers paid for the system. The Highway Trust Fund should be dedicated to building and maintaining roads and bridges. If trust fund spending were properly prioritized, bridge repairs could be funded by current national and state fuel taxes.

To protect poorer American citizens as they struggle to make ends meet, Congress should end pork-barrel projects and earmarks, and devote the monies in the Highway Trust Fund to critical infrastructure repair and expansion. If bike paths and public transit are worthwhile priorities, an excise tax could be levied on bicycles and jogging shoes, and fees for public transit could be raised.

Heidi Sommer is a policy intern and H. Sterling Burnett is a senior fellow with the National Center for Policy Analysis.

See the Austin, Houston report on TURF's win in court

Posted on October 19, 2007 by Terri Hall

See Austin TV story on You Tube here. See Houston Chronicle coverage below, too.

KXAN News 8 Story
Anti-toll road activist continues case against TxDOT
10/19/2007
By: News 8 Austin Staff

An anti-toll road activist won a three-month continuance in her lawsuit against the Texas Department of Transportation.

Terri Hall of Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom (TURF) now has some more time to develop her case against TxDOT, which claims that it uses public funding to promote toll roads.

TURF says TxDOT’s $9 million ”Keep Texas Moving” campaign amounts to illegal use of funds for political advertising.

“What TxDOT is doing goes way beyond anything than what the Texas Legislature intended. If the Legislature did intend that, then the legislation is unconstitutional,” attorney David van Os said.

TxDOT claims the campaign is informational and legal. They asked Judge Orlinda Naranjo to dismiss the case.

TURF says it has uncovered internal memos showing otherwise. They cite an Aug. 13 memo that TxDOT intends to spend public money to influence upcoming public hearings for the Trans-Texas Corridor.

”We want to be able to ask the people who wrote those memos what exactly they’re talking about when they say ‘we’re going to target this area to try to change people’s minds. We’re going to try to discredit the adversary.’ That’s political,” TURF attorney Charles Riley said.

TURF also wants to block transportation officials from lobbying Congress to allow more tolling.

A court date is set for January.
____________________________________
Houston & Texas News

Oct. 18, 2007
Group gets more time to build case against TxDOT

Link to story here.

AUSTIN — Activists targeting a Texas Department of Transportation toll-road campaign got some extra time to develop their case from a state judge Thursday.

The state attorney general’s office, representing TxDOT, wanted state District Judge Orlinda Naranjo of Travis County to dismiss the case, which seeks to stop state spending on the Keep Texas Moving campaign and on any toll-road lobbying efforts by the agency.

Keep Texas Moving is an effort by TxDOT to solve the state’s transportation issues.

Terri Hall of Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom, which brought the case, contends the campaign violates a state prohibition on state officers or employees using their authority for political purposes.

The state says it is acting legally, that Hall doesn’t have standing to bring the lawsuit, and that work is completed on the campaign’s current phase anyway, so the lawsuit is moot.

Naranjo agreed to a 90-day continuance sought by the group, which wants to gather more documents and possibly take depositions from officials, according to TURF lawyer Charles Riley. Former candidate for attorney general David Van Os also signed on to represent the group.

“This is a good day for Texas taxpayers,” Hall said.

In fighting a three-month delay, Assistant Attorney General Kristina W. Silcocks said, “State employees do not need to have this hanging over their head.”

See the Austin, Houston report on TURF’s win in court