Both Commissioner Lyle Larson and Commissioner Tommy Adkisson spoke to raucous applause from a very frustrated and motivated crowd last night. Both encouraged attendees to contact their legislators IMMEDIATELY to demand our raided highway funds get returned and that they STOP THE WIDESPREAD TOLLING OF TEXAS! Larson emphasized that though he’s been with us since the beginning, he has no direct oversight over TxDOT, only the Governor and Legislature do. So it’s imperative that we contact the Legislature immediately and follow-up frequently during this legislative session that ends in May.

Freshmen State Representatives Nathan Macias and Joe Farias also spoke and received hearty applause for their strong stand against the tolling of existing highways and they, too, encouraged us to contact our representatives about this issue. Macias welcomed constituent feedback as “refreshing.”

CONTACT YOUR REPRESENTATIVES TO SAY NO TO TOLLS!

To find out who your representatives are, go here.

Contact State Senator Jeff Wentworth (210-826-7800) and State Representative Frank Corte (210- 349-0320) and respectfully but firmly demand they return the STOLEN highway funds and STOP THE TOLLING OF 281 IN THEIR OWN DISTRICT!

TxDOT tries to silence citizens AGAIN!

TxDOT REFUSED to allow citizens to put out a table with petitions and information saying it was private property. We called a County Commissioner and Attorney both of which said this was a PUBLIC MEETING and PUBLIC FORUM and the facility was rented with TAXPAYER MONEY and the citizens have a FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT to FREE SPEECH! So we handed out our information at the end, but lost precious opportunities to inform attendees about the TRUTH for a good portion of the meeting.

Then, TxDOT cut the microphones about three-quarters of the way through the meeting claiming they suddenly had “sound problems.” This agency is shameless and behaving as dictators who are trying to SILENCE THE CITIZENS!

GET YOUR COMMENTS ON THE RECORD BY FEB 16!

EMAIL comments to get on the LEGAL RECORD here or fax comments to (210) 349-2101.

TOLL PARTY COMMENTS AT 281 PUBLIC HEARING

Here’s 3 things that everyone needs to know:

1) The needed overpasses for 281 are already paid for! A plan for overpasses and expansion of HWY 281 has been presented to and PROMISED to the public in prior public meetings since the late 90s. I hold in my hands that ORIGINAL improvement plan that should have begun in 2004 as scheduled and would have been completed last year. The cost was $100 million all the way to the county line. TxDOT’s own documents show they have $100 million RIGHT NOW to install these improvements. Now to build this as a tollway, it’s more than DOUBLE the pricetag to the taxpaying public.

2) This toll plan has two bidders. Both are foreign companies. TxDOT is planning to give one of these foreign companies control of our PUBLIC infrastructure for the next 50 years…that will outlive most of us in this room. This isn’t just some ordinary highway project. We’re talking about something that will impact our children and grandchildren and change San Antonio forever!

These contracts include something called non-compete agreements where TxDOT would give control of the free routes around the tollway to this private company, which not only means they’d control the signal lights and speed limits on the non-toll access roads, but they may also control Stone Oak Parkway and Bulverde Rd. We won’t know for sure until the contract is already signed since this is being negotiated in SECRET, and even our elected officials cannot see the terms of this contract UNTIL AFTER IT’S SIGNED. So TxDOT’s version of tolls won’t solve congestion; it’ll manipulate it for profit. Over the next 50 years, this foreign company stands to make $1.6 billion just on this one 8 mile stretch for a project that costs about $200 million to build. This is truly highway robbery!

3) The Legislature has stolen our highway funds to the tune of nearly $10 billion and spent it on political pet projects for things like tourism, TX Commission on the arts, enhancing benefits for public employees, and WE THE TAXPAYERS need to demand they give it back. If that money had not been stolen from us, we would not be discussing tolls across Texas! We don’t lack funds; our politicians lack fiscal accountability. Call Wentworth and Corte and demand we get this money back and that they STOP the tolling of 281!

The taxpayers have a right to vote on matters of such grave public interest. We are the owners of government, not an unelected bureaucracy behaving as dictators of public policy.

We’re tired of the manipulation of the timing of the stop lights on 281 and bringing this corridor to needless gridlock by stealing our time since last January when a lawsuit shed light on these fraudulent plans. They’ve hijacked the PUBLIC’S highway to push a political agenda by misleading the public into thinking the ONLY solution is a tollway while NOT telling us they already have the plan and money to fix it, but they’d rather hand it over to a foreign company and collect tolls without limit than install the simple, sensible, less expensive solution they promised the public would be done last year.

This Governor and his Transportation Department are guilty of colluding to defraud the public and of purposely increasing our cost of transportation from pennies a day under gas tax to dollars per day under an unaccountable toll system in the hands of a foreign company for private gain WITHOUT THE PUBLIC’S CONSENT! TxDOT’s own studies show toll rates of up to $1 a mile! We’re talking about $2,000-4,000 more per year to use our PUBLIC highways. The community will not let you dictate this to us and target 281 users while those in other parts of town enjoy FREE routes. You’re taking away our freedom of mobility to line the pockets of private corporations. The taxpayers not TxDOT have the final say on the public’s roads.

Get informed and get involved. SAY NO to this money grab because they’re selling Texas to the highest bidder unless we stop them!

Link to article here. PPPs or P3 stands for Public-Private Partnerships where the government partners with private industry on a public project. In Texas, they refer to these as Comprehensive Development Agreements or CDAs for toll projects granting the private entity almost limitless control over toll rates, control of surrounding free roads, the power to choose what businesses locate on the tollway, and control over our infrastructure for the life of the contract (usually 50 years); thereby leaving the taxpaying public little or no recourse though its a public asset.

Ontario behind times in P3/AFP money for roads
Roadbuilders are posed to use financing model for roads
BY PETER KENTER
Correspondent
Daily Commercial News
February 2, 2007

TORONTO
Whether you call it Public Private Partnership (P3) or Alternative Financing and Procurement (AFP) — the term favoured by Infrastructure Ontario — the province’s roadbuilders are ready to embrace the model in hopes that it will spur major projects.

However, unless the provincial government changes the responsibilities of either Infrastructure Ontario or the Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO), that can’t happen.

“Infrastructure Ontario has not been assigned any roadbuilding projects, so we aren’t working on any,” says Paulette den Elzen, manager of project communications with Infrastructure Ontario.

“At the same time, only Infrastructure Ontario is authorized to employ the AFP model. Different provinces are doing different things.”

Indeed they are — and roadbuilding appears to be one of them. From British Columbia’s Sea-to-Sky Highway and Alberta’s Edmonton Ring Road to New Brunswick’s Confederation Bridge, large scale P3 transportation projects dominate in provinces outside of Ontario.

“Other provinces appear to embrace this roadbuilding model and it doesn’t appear to be ideological,” says Dave Garner, manager of business development for Miller Paving. “There are provincial Liberals, Conservatives and NDP governments using the model. I’ve asked the same question — why no major transportation projects in this province? The province’s answer seems to be that they haven’t found a project that could fit the model.”

Garner says the biggest issue standing in the way of new AFP roadbuilding projects appears to be the province’s unhappy relationship with the 407 toll road. While the construction of the highway could be considered a successful P3, ideological disagreements with the 99-year lease won by the Cintra-Macquarie partners and its relative autonomy in setting toll rates have left a bad taste in the collective mouths of Premier Dalton McGuinty’s Liberals, who have repeatedly taken the operators to court in failed efforts to re-establish control.

“The province even adopted another name for it — AFP — so it wouldn’t appear to be changing its policies in mid-stream,” says Garner.

Jeff Morrison, executive director of the Road and Infrastructure Program, Canada says the federal government has encouraged the use of P3s by provinces and municipalities which receive federal funds for roadbuilding projects. “But that’s not to suggest that they have to use P3s,” he says.

Still, there are rumblings of plans to use AFPs for Ontario roads.

“The Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal, David Caplan, has told us that he wants to introduce AFPs to the roadbuilding sector,” says Rob Bradford, executive director of the Ontario Road Builders Association.

“The mechanism is there, but we’ve seen nothing so far in terms of putting the systems into place to make things happen.”

“There doesn’t appear to be any thrust to put these projects on the priority list,” agrees Garner. “The 407 project got off the ground because Bob Rae saw it as a priority and instructed the Ministry of Transportation to approach it that way. We’ve been discussing an extension of the 407 for two decades now. It won’t move up anyone’s agenda unless somebody champions it.”

John Beck, CEO and chair of Aecon Group, says he’s optimistic the province can take advantage of the P3 roadbuilding model.

“The concept of P3s is widely accepted by the construction community and the province is using AFPs to build hospitals and courthouses,” says Beck. “With respect to the 407 toll road issues, these were resolved about a year ago. I’m confident the government will soon be looking at an AFP roadbuilding model even if that means private sector financing, construction and design without a privately-operated toll system.”

For those who have heard consistently from our U.S. congressmen and senators that this push to privatize our freeways turning them into cash cow tollways along with the push to build a network of NAFTA superhighways IS A STATE ISSUE….here’s the proof it’s not. There has been and continues to be a NATIONAL PUSH at the FEDERAL LEVEL by key members of the Bush Administration to turn our infrastructure over to private, foreign companies for the benefit of a select few multi-national companies in the name of “free trade” (primarily to import cheap Chinese goods).

Read more here and here.

U.S. DOT urges privatization of highways, infrastructure
Landline Magazine

Monday, Jan. 8, 2007 – The U.S. Department of Transportation is eager to assist states in leasing and selling off their roads and infrastructure to private investors.

Transportation Secretary Mary Peters announced Monday, Jan. 8, that the department has designed model legislation for states to use to authorize public-private partnerships for “building, owning or operating highways, mass transit, railroads, airports, seaports or other transportation infrastructure.”

The DOT is using the model to reduce or remove barriers to private investment on the grounds that more lanes and roads will help ease congestion on the highways.

As has been reported extensively by Land Line Magazine, states claim to be strapped for cash for highway and transportation projects.

A highly publicized scenario involved Indiana, where the state legislature and Gov. Mitch Daniels authorized the lease of the 157-mile Indiana Toll Road to private, foreign investors for $3.85 billion in up-front cash. That lease will last 75 years and the private consortium of Cintra-Macquarie will keep the tolls in exchange for maintenance and operation.

The DOT used the Indiana legislation and other states’ efforts to privatize in its model legislation for other states.

Illinois leased the Chicago Skyway in 2005 to Cintra of Spain and Macquarie of Australia in the first such privatization effort of its kind, authorized in the August 2005 bundle of federal highway legislation known as SAFETEA-LU.

Twenty-one states and Puerto Rico have some authority for privatizing infrastructure, according to the DOT, but Peters said the model legislation will remove remaining barriers.

Officials in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Ohio, Maryland, Delaware and Kansas have all recently publicized their interest in privatizing major highways and turnpikes in those states.

See the independent truckers association’s response to this outrageous nmove by the feds here.

DOT model legislation for highway privatization is ‘flawed’
By David Tanner
Landline Magazine
January 9, 2007

When U.S. Department of Transportation officials announced this week that they would provide states with model legislation to pursue private leases for highways and infrastructure, OOIDA (Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Assocation) officials were furious.

“We think it’s outrageous,” said Todd Spencer, executive vice president of the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association. “It is unprecedented for DOT to be writing model legislation for states and we are contesting it.”

The U.S. DOT issued a press release Monday, Jan. 8, citing congestion relief and highway safety as reasons for allowing private investors to build and maintain new toll roads, leasing existing toll roads or add lanes to major highways.

Cable news network CNN contacted Spencer and OOIDA for comments on the issue of privatization, and Spencer appeared Tuesday, Jan. 9 on “Lou Dobbs Tonight.”

In the interview with Dobbs, Spencer discussed the “crony politics” of the Bush administration and Wall Street for touting privatization of the nation’s infrastructure.

“Those roads belong to the public,” he told Land Line Magazine following the interview. “We need to tell them, ‘these roads are not yours to sell.’ “

Contacting lawmakers, he said, is something truckers and others can do to show their feelings on the issues affecting commerce and daily quality of life.

Spencer cited recent news from Pennsylvania as an example of how big money can sway political agendas.

Gov. Ed Rendell solicited letters of expressed interest from possible investors for the state’s turnpike. That action led to 48 letters of interest, showing how domestic and foreign investors are waiting for such deals to be offered.

“The Pennsylvania Turnpike could fetch billions,” Spencer said, but the long-term costs to consumers, truckers and motorists would be astounding, he added.

Pennsylvania, like Indiana officials claimed about their state in 2006, is strapped for highway cash, making it tempting to fall for the lure of private investment in roads.

But Spencer believes those same states have shown irresponsibility when assembling their highway budgets in recent years as they continued to work on legislation to allow private investment in their infrastructure.

“We need to hold our elected officials accountable for our highway dollars,” Spencer said.

Private investors from Spain and Australia were successful in 2006 in leasing the Indiana Toll Road for 75 years, paying $3.85 billion up front for the right to collect the tolls long term.

Pennsylvania could be next as Gov. Rendell grooms the investors for a possible bidding process for the turnpike.

Ohio, New Jersey, Delaware and Kansas are on a growing list of states seeking private investment in their turnpike systems.

And with the U.S. DOT pushing model legislation to help them out, Spencer believes the inevitable is possible without an intervention from the public.

“The message the administration is sending to the states is, you don’t have to be responsible for your transportation budgets, you can just sell off the roads,” Spencer said.

Many citizens have repeatedly asked if Texans can recall this Governor (especially in light of the fact he was re-elected with only 39% of the vote)…now there’s calls for what our representatives CAN DO and that is….IMPEACH him!

Link to editorial here.

The governor must be impeached
By Paul Perry
Waxahachie Daily Light
February 4, 2007

The governor’s mandate of the HPV vaccine is indicative of a man who has lost touch with the citizens of our state.

As reported in DallasBlog.com, Merck’s Gardasil (HPV) vaccine already has been under fire nationally from the National Vaccine Information Center, which claims that “Merck’s clinical trials did not prove the human papillomavirus vaccine designed to prevent cervical cancer and genital warts is safe to give to young girls.” NVIC cites the trial studies as showing there were serious problems with adverse reaction to the shots: “Nearly 90 percent of Gardasil recipients … followed-up for safety reported one or more adverse events within 15 days of vaccination, particularly at the injection site. Pain and swelling at injection occurred in approximately 83 percent of Gardasil” recipients. A majority of the young women who received Gardasil complained about “serious adverse events such as headache, gastroenteritis, appendicitis, pelvic inflammatory disease, asthma, bronchospasm and arthritis,” according to NVIC.

This vaccine is very questionable and has not been in use long enough for there to be a comfort factor with many parents. What will it do to growing bodies long term? I am not opposed to vaccines in general, but the governor can count me as a one dissatisfied constituent on this one.

At best this move is irresponsible, at worst, it reeks of the odor of quid pro quo like some of the governor’s other moves. Why was the legislature circumvented by the executive in this case? The legislature had just now convened and had not had time to even visit the vaccine issue in full. A rational person should ask the question, just what was promised to the governor here?

Will big pharma dollars now back the governor’s future aspirations? A vice presidential nomination seems to be being talked about in Austin. The taxpayer- and property owner-hostile, foreign profiteer-backed Trans-Texas Corridor also comes to mind; Cintra-Zachary would no doubt love to keep the governor on the friends list. Why is it necessary to legislate away normal state and federal constitutional protections to build a road, Guv? It appears large interests can have all the friends they can afford, especially in Texas.

While the governor’s picked committee on appraisal reform came forward with a few decent suggestions concerning spending limitation, the overall report was at best anemic. They did not address the imbalances in the appeal process, for instance. In meetings all over the state I hear taxpayers suggest moving lesser dollar appeals to the JP courts. The governor’s committee proposal suggesting the appointment of Central Appraisal District representatives by the district judges and calling them “taxpayer representatives” would be funny if it wasn’t so sad. All over the state, Texans called for at least some members of both Appraisal and Appeals Boards to be popularly elected. I know that some members of the committee were people of good will, but a reasonable person could wonder how stacked the committee was with the governor’s own cronies. The arrogance over the vaccine issue seals it. The governor must be impeached.

I wish we didn’t share a last name.

Paul D. Perry is a resident of Ellis County and former Ellis County Justice of the Peace for Pct. 4.

Link to article here.

Watchdog Worried About U.S. Meetings With Canada, Mexico
By Nathan Burchfiel
CNSNews.com
February 02, 2007

(CNSNews.com) – A government watchdog is calling for more transparency in talks between U.S., Canadian and Mexican officials who are discussing a “vision of North America” that some critics worry Judicial Watch this week released documents obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request that include U.S. officials’ notes from the North American Forum, a September 2006 meeting with Canadian and Mexican officials that explored ways to create “genuine partnerships.”

That meeting followed the March 2005 creation of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), which the U.S. government calls a “trilateral effort to increase security and enhance prosperity among the United States, Canada and Mexico through greater cooperation and information sharing.”

Several points of discussion at the September meeting worried Judicial Watch, most notably a note in one set of documents referring to “evolution by stealth.” The discussions also touched on integration of energy supply, easing immigration among the three countries and closing the “income gap” between Mexico and the U.S. and Canada.

“I don’t know that there’s an appreciation or an understanding that this is what the American government is busy spending its time doing,” Chris Farrell, Judicial Watch’s director of research and investigation, told Cybercast News Service.

“I think it’s curious … when they advocate in their own documents that a position of stealth should be adopted in trying to integrate the three countries,” Farrell said. “That’s rather extraordinary.”

The group released documents from the meeting, including some handwritten notes taken by participant Deborah Bolton, a political advisor for U.S. Northern Command. Also included in the notes is a paper by Robert Pastor, the director of American University’s Center for North American Studies.

“Our purpose is to build a greater sense of being a part of North America,” Pastor wrote. “We do not want to displace the pride each of us feels in our countries, but rather to supplement that with a feeling of being North American.”

Pastor recommended some questions for discussion including, “Should a new transportation corridor be designed and built between Canada and Mexico?” and “Should there be a North American Passport to facilitate travel within the three countries?”

Those kinds of proposals worry some conservatives, who fear that increased cooperation with its North American neighbors will harm United States sovereignty and lead to the creation of a North American version of the European Union.

According to Pastor, those critics have “nothing to fear,” because he said none of the countries are taking the discussions seriously.

“There’s a conspiratorial mood among certain groups out there that are trying to make it sound like as if this conference was more than just a conference, that somehow or other it set the agenda for the three governments,” he told Cybercast News Service.

“I wish that were the case, frankly, that the three governments would take seriously some of the issues that were being discussed, but none of them are.”

Pastor said that “those who are fearful that somehow this conference is creating a vast new agenda have nothing to fear. Those who are hopeful that we may approach our neighbors in more constructive ways have more reason to be frustrated.”

He said the secrecy surrounding the meetings was a “mistake” and that he favored issuing a statement and report on the discussions, “but the three leaders who organized it thought that it would be a more productive discussion if the participants were not quoted and could express their views without fear of being distorted.”

Pastor is also an author of the Council of Foreign Relations’ May 2005 report called “Building a North American Community.” The report is at the center of critics’ fears that the goal of the SPP and North American Forum is a political union.

“The global challenges faced by North America cannot be met solely through unilateral or bilateral efforts or existing patterns of cooperation,” the report states. “They require deepened cooperation based on the principle … that ‘our security and prosperity are mutually dependent and complementary.”

Supporters of the report’s recommendations point to the fact that it says a North American community “should rely more on the market and less on bureaucracy, more on pragmatic solutions to shared problems than on grand schemes of confederation or union, such as those in Europe.”

Link to story here.

Texas newspapers sold to Australian interests
Editorial change could silence critics of superhighways
By Jerome R. Corsi
WorldNetDaily.com
January 29, 2007

Macquarie, an Australian investment consortium involved in leasing U.S. toll roads, has begun acquiring newspapers in Texas, a move critics say is designed to silence grassroots objection to the planned Trans-Texas Corridor.

That highway project is believed to be part of a much larger plan that eventually could, critics allege, tie the economies, lifestyles and even governments of the United States, Mexico and Canada together.

Halyard Capital just days ago announced the sale of its portfolio company, American Consolidated Media, which publishes 40 community newspapers and shopping publications in nine Texas and Oklahoma communities, to the Macquarie Media Group for $80 million.

Sal Costello, the founder of TexasTollParty.com and a vocal critic of the Texas Department of Transportation plans to build the Trans-Texas Corridor toll road parallel to Interstate 35, told WND the newspaper deal was “absurd.”

“Macquarie being allowed to buy these newspapers is just another con job,” said Costello, obviously upset at the acquisition. “Macquarie is buying our news organizations to hide the fact that they are stealing our land.”

On his blog, Costello had noted that the Macquarie purchase comes “after the ACM’s rural independent newspapers have been the most vocal opposition to the Trans Texas Corridor.”

“Countless articles over the past months and years peg the TTC as an eminent domain land grab. ACM’s publications had placed serious political pressure on the TTC,” he said. “The newspapers are the main communication tool for many of the rural Texas communities, with many citizens at risk of losing their homes and farms through eminent domain. Future TTC contracts are estimated to affect about one-half million acres of land, and 4,000 miles of Texas toll roads.”

Macquarie Media Group is a wholly owned subsidiary of Macquarie Group Australia which also owns the Macquarie Infrastructure Group, one of the largest private developers of toll roads in the world.

According to the Public Private Partnerships section of the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration, Macquarie is an investment partner along with Cintra Concesiones de Infraestructuras de Transporte, S.A., in the deal to lease the Chicago Skyway on a 99-year lease. The Chicago Skyway deal was concluded in August 2005 and was the first long-term lease of an existing public road in the United States. Cintra is a publicly-listed company headquartered in Spain, owned by the Madrid-based Groupo Ferrovial.

According to the FHWA website, Cintra and Macquarie Infrastructure Group also combined in 2006 to finalize a 75-year lease on the Indiana Toll Road.

Macquarie is not involved in the Texas Trans-Texas Corridor financing. Cintra is the foreign investment capital group that is providing the funding for the TTC-35 project.

As reported previously by WND, Macquarie participated in the EuroMoney Seminar, entitled, North American PPP 2006: The Infrastructure Finance Conference,” a “networking” PPP conference held in New York City at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel, September 19-20, 2006, at a cost of $2,500 per attendee.

On January 11, 2007, in a separate announcement, President Bush nominated David James Gribbin to be general counsel of the Department of Transportation. Gribbin previously had served as a division director for Macquarie in Washington, D.C.

Prior to this most recent nomination, Gribbins had been serving as General Counsel to the FHWA, a position then-DOT Secretary Norman Mineta appointed him to fill in 2004.

A spokesman from Macquarie told WND that Macquarie Media Group is not planning to change the editorial content of the American Consolidated Media publications. “A key part of the attraction of American Consolidated Media,” the spokesman told WND, “is that the ACM publications delivers news and stories that are of interest to the communities they serve.”

Asked whether the Macquarie Media Group acquired ACM to silence critics of PPP projects that Macquarie Infrastructure Group is pursuing in the United States, the spokesperson said, “No. Each division in the Macquarie Group has their own investment funds and makes their own investment decision. The Macquarie Media Group is focused on making media investments around the world. ACM is an attractive investment because their publications serve the local communities. The Macquarie Media Group will seek to grow the ACM portfolio, but not change their editorial direction.”

Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, is among the leaders in Congress expressing alarm at the coordinated plans that appear to be moving the United States into and beyond “partnerships” with Mexico and Canada.

Asked about the Department of Transportation’s work with Dallas-based trade group NASCO, the North American SuperCorridor Coalition Inc., and the Texas Department of Transportation plans to build the Trans-Texas Corridor, Poe told WND “the NAFTA superhighway plans exist to move goods from Mexico through the United States to Canada. It appears to be another one of the open-border philosophies that chips away at American sovereignty, all in the name of so-called trade.”

He believes the public ought to be involved in such decisions, especially those states directly affected such as Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas.

Rep. Virgil Goode, R-Va., has introduced House Concurrent Resolution 40 to express the sense of Congress that the United States should not build a NAFTA superhighway system and should not enter into an agreement with Mexico and Canada to form a North American Union.

Many of the plans are being assembled under the Security and Prosperity Partnership, to which President Bush of the United States, President Fox of Mexico and Prime Minister Martin of Canada agreed in 2005.

Listen in here or read the interview with William Lutz of the Lone Star Report below. Senator Carona continues to lead the PEOPLE’S fight against TxDOT’s verison of toll roads and the Trans Texas Corridor!

Interview: Sen. Transportation chairman John Carona
by William Lutz
Lone Star Report
January 29, 2007

When you’re talking to Texans about cars and highways, you’re guaranteed their rapt attention. As Sen. John Carona (R-Dallas) well knows.

Carona last year won Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst’s nod for chairman of the Senate Committee on Transportation and Homeland Security. From toll roads to gasoline taxes to red-light cameras, issues before the panel stretch with the endlessness of a West Texas interstate.

Already the new chairman has filed several noteworthy bills and called for important changes in Texas transportation policies. He discussed it with LSR this week.

LSR: How do you view the Trans-Texas Corridor?

Carona: To this day, there is still a great deal of controversy surrounding the corridor. Many people feel like their voices have not been heard. They simply have not been listened to. It’s one of the reasons why on March 1 we’re going to hold a hearing here in Austin and allow the public to come forward and speak directly to the Legislature about their concerns.

If you have rural interests – you’re a farm or ranch owner – you’re very concerned about eminent domain.

If you are a taxpayer in this state, you are very concerned about what amount of state money, if any, will go into the project, how long it will take to be built.

If you are an elected leader in one of our communities along I-35, you’re concerned about what the Trans-Texas Corridor may do in terms of diverting business away from your center of commercial activity in your small town or region.

So there are a lot of reasons to be concerned.

Of course, the underlying concern [with the corridor] being whether or not it’s good public policy to have a private company operate a major Texas roadway, as would be the [case with the] corridor should it ever be built.

LSR: What is toll equity, and what changes should be made to it?

Carona: The term toll equity has been coined in that the Transportation commission and TxDOT will have to financially supplement a toll project that may not have as great a volume in one part of the state as in others. Not all areas are really automatically attractive for toll construction. Yet at the current time with limitations on the state funding for roadways, that might be the only way build a toll [road].

The question comes in with the subjectivity of the process. Many people feel that the formula that’s been used to provide equity – the amount of supplement for one toll project in one part of the state – hasn’t necessarily been consistent with the way the money has been applied in other toll projects in other regions.
I think you’ll see the Legislature take a much more careful approach in that, and really begin to examine whether or not there ought to be toll equity and whether or not these projects are being handled in a fair and consistent fashion. And I think that’s an appropriate thing for the Legislature to do.

LSR: What are comprehensive development agreements, and what should the Legislature do with them?

Carona: Comprehensive development agreements are agreements between the public (in this case the state) and private companies to be able to build roads in this state. And these Comprehensive Development Agreements, or CDAs, are entered into after they are placed out for bid with private companies.
Most recently – again – the conversation involving CDAs has to do with major toll projects throughout the state.

But there are some concerns about these comprehensive development agreements, which the Legislature authorized into law over the last six-year period. In particular, the concern is these agreements contain provisions that limit competition. The non-compete provisions actually keep the state from building other free roads that might ultimately compete with the toll road over whatever the length of the CDA is.

[CDA length] is also part of the concern. These CDA agreements can extend 70 years. And, in fact, the Transportation commission would like to take that limit off altogether, where, in theory, private operators could come in and operate these Texas roadways for a 100-year period of time. I think that’s inappropriate. It goes far beyond what ought to be the reasonable authority of the Texas Transportation Commission. So those are the kind of changes we’ll be looking to make in the years ahead. [Carona’s SB 149 would prohibit non-compete clauses in CDAs.]< LSR: How would you characterize the relationship between the department [of transportation], the Texas Transportation Commission, and your local elected officials in North Texas? Carona: Let's say, right now, that relationship is strained. Many people feel that while TxDOT and the Transportation commission talk about local control and local decision-making, in reality, that means local as long as you agree with TxDOT or the Transportation commission. And if you disagree, of course, the commission has the ability to withhold funds that might otherwise go to your particular project. And that's the kind of relationship that people are frustrated with. And that's what prompted my recent call for the current chairman of the Transportation commission [Ric Williamson] not to remain on the commission. Upon the expiration of his current term, he perhaps [should] step aside and let someone new come in. In many quarters of the state, the Transportation commission has worn out its welcome. And I think we need to bring in new faces, and we need to bring in a policy from Austin where the folks here listen to what the local needs are and are willing to address the transportation priorities in the fashion recommended to them by locally elected officials, [who] candidly are in a position to know best what the immediate transportation needs really are. LSR: What are some of the mistakes TxDOT has made in North Texas? Carona: One concern, of course, is the proliferation of toll roads. In North Texas, we have a general attitude of support of tolls, but recently announced toll projects - like [State Highway] 121 up in Collin County [were] very unpopular. People feel like they have already paid for that through with their gasoline taxes. Another example that should have been handled differently would have been the relationship between the North Texas Tollway Authority (NTTA) and TxDOT. Many people feel that TxDOT has attempted to shut down NTTA, that they [TxDOT leaders] consider NTTA as an impediment to what TxDOT would like to do in its statewide policy, when in reality, NTTA was developed to be able to focus on the immediate needs of North Texas, and be in the best possible position to provide efficient roadways at the lowest possible cost. That's the right mission, and NTTA has been on the right track, in my opinion. But to see the encroachment by TxDOT onto the duties previously handled by NTTA is a mistake. And that's been one of the things to cause great concern and anxiety amongst locally elected officials. LSR: Tell us about the bill you have filed [SB 257] allowing for the use of local sales taxes for transportation projects. Carona: North Texas has a major congestion problem. It's only going to get worse. What the bill I filed would do is enable local communities to hold a local vote to determine whether or not they would like to exempt from the current sales tax cap, which the state imposes, up to one penny to be used for transportation projects. If you are a region in North Texas that does not use DART [Dallas Area Rapid Transit], for example, if it's approved by a local vote of the people, you could elect to collect up to one penny and join DART. If, on the other hand, you're a city like Dallas [that] already has DART, then, of course, you've taken care of your transportation needs, but because up to one penny would have been exempted, you could again elect to use that additional one penny in capacity for economic development purposes, as other cities currently do through what's referred to as the 4-a and 4-b sales taxes. What we're trying to do is just give North Texas more options to be able to meet transportation needs. Specifically, this option would be used to further rail and mass transit in North Texas. LSR: When you're talking about changing how we do toll roads, you're not talking about abolishing all new toll roads, are you? Carona: Toll roads are a good thing, not a bad thing. But you can have too much of a good thing. The point legislators are trying to make in Austin now - and this is a view that is widespread among legislators of both political parties – is that presently we are relying too heavily on toll roads into the future to meet Texas’s transportation needs. Virtually every major project on the board today is to be built as a toll road.

That’s simply irresponsible. The public has paid for a [transportation system] through gasoline taxes that are paid into the state every time someone goes to the pump and fills his car. To continue to pay those taxes, and to have to pay tolls for every major artery going forward in the state – as least those that are built new – is in essence double taxation. And I think it’s an unfair burden on people across the state.

Some new toll roads are a good thing, but they should be part of a total transportation mix of options.

That’s why we’re proposing other things like the indexing of the current gasoline tax. The current gasoline tax has not been raised since 1991.

One of the things before the Legislature this session will be whether or not to change the law so that that gasoline tax at its current level can simply be increased at the rate of inflation going forward.

I think that’s a very reasonable compromise. Certainly, the cost of construction has increased dramatically since 1991 … Indexing the current fuel tax from this point forward to match the rate of inflation is one very modest yet responsible way to meet the roadway needs of the state.

On an annual basis, this would amount to little more than one penny per gallon of gasoline. And I think that’s a very affordable option instead of [what] we’re seeing now, which would be the proliferation of toll roads.

LSR: Are there any other initiatives you’d like to highlight?

Carona: On a local basis, one of the issues I care very passionately about is the use of red-light cameras [at stoplights]. I think it’s an issue that’s becoming increasingly controversial.

I am not an opponent of the use of red-light cameras. What I am an opponent of is the use of them as a means for cities to profit for purposes of paying for other city budget needs. Cities receive now sales tax revenue, and they receive property tax revenue. They should not be initiating yet another form of revenue, which is the hanging of red-light cameras on practically every major intersection throughout the city.

Cameras ought to be limited specifically to those areas that have a legitimate public safety concern. For those locations, and for those reasons, I support cameras.

But when they go beyond that, as a revenue-raiser, as is the case currently in the City of Dallas, surrounding cities, and the City of El Paso – all of which are either using or beginning to use red-light camera technology, [I am concerned]. Those cities are already placing substantial line items in their budget to account for the profit that they make off of these cameras.

When the use of these cameras goes toward profits as opposed to public safety, I think that’s wrong.

So one of the pieces of legislation that I’ve filed [SB 125] would be to take those surplus monies – those profits, if you would – [and] after a city recovers its costs of buying the camera and maintaining the camera, and either using those profits to fund the state’s trauma-care fund, which is what deals with traffic accidents, or as an alternative.[after all that], we need at the state level to lower the fine that’s currently on the books in most cities and cap it on a statewide basis. So cities can indeed recover the cost of the cameras and the operation, so that the profit motive is taken out.

Once you take the profit motive out, I predict we’ll see much less use of those cameras in our communities.

Editor’s note: A video version of this interview will be posted to http://www.dallasblog.com. It is the standard policy of The Lone Star Report to edit interviews for length, grammar, and clarity. So the version published here may differ slightly from the video version.

Link to article here.

House resolution opposes North American Union
Lawmakers seek to block NAFTA superhighway system, continental integration
By Jerome R. Corsi
World Net Daily
January 26, 2007

Rep. Virgil Goode, R-Va., has introduced a House resolution expressing congressional opposition to construction of a NAFTA Super Highway System or entry into a North American Union with Mexico and Canada.

Goode said the goal behind House Concurrent Resolution 40, introduced Monday, is “to block a NAFTA Superhighway System and to indicate the opposition of the Congress to the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) of North America that was declared by President Bush, Mexico’s then-President Vicente Fox, and Canada’s then-Prime Minister Paul Martin, at the conclusion of their summit meeting in Waco, Texas, on March 23, 2005.”

The preamble of HCR 40 refers to the Trans-Texas Corridor being built by the Texas Department of Transportation, noting “a NAFTA Super Highway System from the west coast of Mexico through the United States and into Canada has been suggested as part of a North American Union to facilitate trade between the SPP countries.”

A subsequent “whereas” clause notes “the State of Texas has already begun planning of the Trans-Texas Corridor, a major multi-modal transportation project beginning at the United States – Mexico border, which would serve as an initial section of a NAFTA Super Highway System.”

The resolution expresses concern “it could be particularly difficult for Americans to collect insurance from Mexican companies which employ Mexican drivers involved in accidents in the United States, which would likely increase the insurance rates for American drivers.”

Another concern with the plans for a NAFTA Super Highway is that “future unrestricted trucking into the United States can pose a safety hazard due to inadequate maintenance and inspection, and can act collaterally as a conduit for the entry into the United States of illegal drugs, illegal human smuggling, and terrorist activities.”

The Spanish investment consortium, Cintra Concesiones de Infraestructuras de Transporte, S.A., owned by the Madrid-based Groupo Ferrovial, is funding the construction of TTC-35 and will lease the highway for 50 years. To prevent more such foreign leasing of U.S. highways, HCR 40 notes as a risk that “a NAFTA Super Highway would likely include funds from foreign consortiums and be controlled by foreign management, which threatens the sovereignty of the United States.”

Regarding SPP, HCR 40 states “reports issued by the SPP indicate that it has implemented regulatory changes among the three countries that circumvent United States trade, transportation, homeland security, and border security functions and that the SPP will continue to do so in the future.”

Further, HCR 40 charges “the actions taken by the SPP to coordinate border security by eliminating obstacles to migration between Mexico and the United States actually makes the United States-Mexico border less secure, because Mexico is the primary source country of illegal immigrants into the United States.”

The resolution calls for Congress to express its sentiment that:

* the United States should not engage in the construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement Super Highway System;

* the United States should not allow the Security and Prosperity Partnership to implement further regulations that would create a North American Union with Mexico and Canada; and

* the president of the United States should indicate strong opposition to these acts or any other proposals that threaten the sovereignty of the United States.

As WND previously reported, in the 109th Congress, Goode had introduced HCR 487, which is substantially the same as the re-introduced HCR 40.

WND has also reported Goode has introduced two additional bills into the new Congress, with the intent of blocking any North American integration by the Bush administration. The two additional resolutions are:

* H.C.R. 18. Expressing disapproval by the House of Representatives of the Social Security totalization agreement signed by the Commissioner of Social Security and the Director General of the Mexican Social Security Institute June 29, 2004. Joined by 27 co-sponsors. Introduced Jan. 4, 2007.

* H.C.R. 22. Expressing the sense of Congress that HCR 40 currently has five co-sponsors, all Republicans: John J. Duncan Jr. of Tennessee, Virginia Foxx of North Carolina, Jones of North Carolina, Ron Paul of Texas, Cliff Stearns of Florida and Zach Wamp of Tennessee.

Link to WOAI story here.

Joe Krier here claims that there was controversy like this surrounding the construction of the interstate highway system by Eisenhower. HARDLY! The interstate system didn’t take swaths of private land the width of 4 footballs fields and effectively cut off normal wildlife migration patterns with 1,200 foot slabs of concrete without exits or overpasses. Just the first 4 corridors of the Trans Texas Corridor (if built out as proposed), would take 3 times the land of all the existing interstates in Texas today. Also, Eisenhower wanted to build the interstates for national security, not to turn over massive amounts of Texas infrastructure to foreign control! The pro-tollers are out of touch and don’t have their facts straight.

Truth is, there’s nothing even remotely like the TTC anywhere in the world. It’s not only the biggest eminent domain project in U.S. history, it’s horrible public policy, and the decisions of whether to build it or not is being cut off from the taxpaying public and being forcibly foisted upon Texans against their will.

EXCLUSIVE: Measure in Legislature Would Kill Trans Texas Corridor
San Antonio State Rep says toll road proposal ‘must be stopped by the people of Texas’
By Jim Forsyth
WOAI Radio
Thursday, January 25, 2007

A measure introduced in the Texas Legislature Thursday would kill the controversial Trans Texas Corridor, 1200 WOAI News reported today.

State Rep. David Liebowitz (D-San Antonio) says his bill would strip the Texas Department of Transportation of the authority to buy land for the Corridor, and sell bonds based on the expectation of future toll revenues needed to build it. It would also remove TxDOT’s authority to contract with private firms to build the massive project, and would remove tax breaks included in the current Corridor enabling legislation.

Liebowitz says the Trans Texas Corridor would destroy rural Texas, make life miserable for farmers, seize hundreds of thousands of acres of land now occupied by homes, businesses, and ranches, and allow private companies to dictate toll rates and potentially put existing companies out of business.

“This would destroy rural Texas as we know it,” Liebowitz said. “It must be stopped by the people of Texas.”

But Joe Krier, head of the transportation lobby Texans for Safe, Efficient Transportation said Liebowitz’ bill is a ‘huge mistake.’

“The Trans Texas Corridor is one of the most visionary announcements in the history of the state,” Krier said. “It will make Texas globally competitive in this century and into the next century.”

Liebowitz said there are too many potential disruptions of Texas life for him to be pleased with the Corridor, and he said farmers and ranchers will suffer immeasurably.

“This will not only tear apart farms and split ranches, but the plans for only limited access will mean that if I have cattle on one side of the corridor and I want to get feed to the other side, I might have to travel 25 miles, just to feed my cattle.”

Krier said the same arguments were made about the Interstate Highway System fifty years ago, and now that indispensable system of highways drives the Texas, and American, economies.

“All great projects are controversial, if Dwight Eisenhower announced the Interstate project today it would be controversial, it was controversial when President Eisenhower announced it.”

The Trans Texas Corridor, an ambitious system of toll roads that would connect all portions of Texas, would cost one third again as much as the entire Interstate Highway System, which had a final price tag of about $118 billion. It has been strongly opposed by rural groups as well as anti toll road activists, but has been praised by transportation and business advocates as a way to insure Texas’ prominence in the coming world of global trade, especially with Mexico and Latin America.

Liebowitz says he’s also not crazy about the concessions that will be made to the operator of the Corridor, presumably Cintra-Zachry, a partnership of San Antonio based Zachry Construction Company and a Spanish firm.

“Companies which control, have these very long term leases, to build the Trans Texas Corridor will also have long term leases to control the land along the corridor, and they will have the ability to decide who builds restaurants, gas stations, and on and on, along the route,” he said.

The Corridor is the brainchild of Governor Rick Perry and Texas Department of Transportation Chairman Ric Williamson, but it met with serious and widespread opposition from the public at several dozen public hearings all over the state last fall.

Link to article in Reuters here. Link to more in-depth Sydney Morning Herald article here.

The Sydney Morning Herald and Reuters is reporting that Macquarie Media Group Ltd., a subsidiary of Macquarie Bank, has purchased American Consolidated Media, subject to regulatory approval.

American Consolidated Media owns 40 newspapers, mostly in Texas and Oklahoma. The Hearne Democrat, Calvert Tribune, Alvarado Post, Bonham Journal, Ellis County Chronicle, Ennis Journal, Stephenville Empire Tribune, Waxahachie Daily Light, Midlothian Mirror, and the Franklin Advocate are all owned by ACM. This is Macquarie’s first print media purchase and first move into the U.S. media market.

Macquarie Bank is the parent of Macquarie Infrastructure, one of the largest toll road operators in the world. Macquarie Infrastructure last year partnered with Cintra to purchase a toll road in Indiana and is currently a bidder to control the 281/Loop 1604 toll system for the next 50 years.

D.J. Gribbin, a director for Macquarie, has just been nominated by President Bush to be General Counsel for the U.S. Department of Transportation and is awaiting senate confirmation.

Macquarie Media buys U.S. community newspapers
Reuters
Jan 24, 2007

SYDNEY, Jan 24 (Reuters) – Australia’s Macquarie Media Group said on Wednesday it has agreed to buy American Consolidated Media and Valley Newspapers Holdings LP, which publish 40 local newspapers in parts of Texas and Oklahoma.

Macquarie Media said the acquisition had an enterprise value of A$102 million ($80 million).

The company said the purchase was part of a broader strategy to acquire and grow a portfolio of community newspapers in the United States.