Three separate plans spell out different focus for Texas roads

Highway construction has become a three-lane road in Texas ? one path for local projects, one for a statewide dream and another federal proposal stretching from Michigan to the Rio Grande Valley.

"They're totally independent and separate," Texas Transportation Commissioner Robert Nichols said. The Jacksonville resident, one of five members of the Texas Transportation Commission, is more closely involved with Gov. Rick Perry's Trans-Texas Corridor plan and the new Regional Mobility Authorities than with the federal interstate that, for now, includes a leg through Northeast Texas.

The proposed Trans-Texas Corridor is a network comprised of passenger vehicle highways, lanes for 18-wheelers only, passenger and freight train tracks and utility lines. It would connect major cities without entering them and would cut broad rights-of-way to try to avoid the interstate system's fate of continually adding lanes along hemmed-in routes.

"The Trans-Texas Corridor is a long-term vision that encompasses the entire state," said Robert Black, spokesman for Perry. "It will be built as needed ? folks in East Texas don't need to worry about bulldozers coming next week."

Or next year. The first swath will bisect the state along a north-south line roughly following Interstate 35. Cintra-Zachry, a Spanish corporation selected to build the I-35 corridor, will pay $7.2 billion for the opportunity to build the roads and recoup its investment through tolls. The $7.2 billion includes $1.2 billion the state can spend in conjunction with the corridor, Black said.

"They will have the right to operate the tolls for 50 years," Black said of Cintra, which is working with a San Antonio company. "The tolls cannot be set without state approval. ... This first section is going to be built with no taxpayers' funds."

Cintra's contract is for roads, the first of which are scheduled for completion in 2010. A second bidding process will kick off construction of rail and utility lines.

Black acknowledged growing opposition from farmers and land owners who suspect the state is about to grab significant pieces of rural landscape.

"It's understandable," he said. "But it's important to remember one thing: Gov. Perry ... recognized there would be concerns and nervousness from some of the rural folks over the Trans-Texas Corridor. The Trans-Texas Corridor will be the first highway system in the state and the only highway system that will allow landowners who have the corridor running through their land to collect royalties.

"They'll have the option of either fair-market value for their land, or they can participate in a royalty plan for the next 10 or 20 years, whatever they will be able to negotiate to get from royalties."

Nichols noted that farmers protested when interstates started crossing their fields in the 1950s and 1960s. Now he said the interstate system is plugged up by traffic. That's maddeningly true of I-35, he said, which cannot be widened.

"When we've got that fresh piece of dirt, we don't want to make the same mistake they made 50 years ago," he said. "If we had only made (I-35) wider 50 years ago, we wouldn't be having this conversation today. In the next 20 years, there are going to be an additional 9 million people in the state of Texas, 90 percent of whom will be in those urban corridors and half of whom will be in that one (I-35) section. (Farmers) don't like it. They don't want a toll road going through their farm. I understand that."

Interstate 69 was designated to follow U.S. 59 from Carthage to Texarkana, but that was in a federal highway formula that expired 18 months ago.

"It's easy to designate. It's not easy to fund," Nichols said. "Although it's federally designated to be there, every six years we have a new federal transportation formula, which is a year and six months overdue."

New U.S. Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Tyler, didn't hide his support for I-69 in his successful campaign. In fact, days before the Nov. 2 election, he agreed to join leaders of six counties hoping to make the Northeast Texas leg of I-69 happen. (A west leg leaves Texas at Carthage and hooks back up with the east leg at Texarkana.)

Harrison County Judge Wayne McWhorter, a member of the I-69 Alliance board of directors, recalled delicately asking then-candidate Gohmert if he'd attend a meeting if he won the seat.

"He popped open his calendar, and on Nov. 4 we met," McWhorter said. "Louie came to be a student."

Gohmert issued a statement, in response to a request for comment on transportation issues, calling the I-69 a vital corridor through his district.

"Continuing to address the transportation issues in East Texas is vitally important for our grandchildren and our great-grandchildren," Gohmert said. "Since the constitution requires Congress to create roads, it is an important duty. The I-69 corridor truly is one of those vital projects from every standpoint."

U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, in Longview earlier this month to discuss local emergency response capabilities, added that he is hopeful the 86 cents that Texas highways get for every dollar Texans pay in federal gasoline taxes will rise to 90 cents.

"My goal is to make sure we in Texas get our fair share of that money back for our transportation needs," Cornyn said. "I-69 is key to growth and economic success of this part of the state. It's also important to public safety."

McWhorter said federal highway planners are committed to the Louisiana leg of the interstate, but the Northeast Texas leg is less certain.

"We have to be paying attention," McWhorter said. "We have to be committed so we're assured that leg of I-69 comes up from Nacogdoches through Carthage to Marshall to somewhere near Jefferson to Cass County to somewhere in Bowie County to Texarkana."

Born of the partnerships that built the Dallas/Fort Worth Turnpike and the Houston Beltway in past decades, Regional Mobility Authorities were created in the 2003 legislative session as a way for local leaders to bypass the state highway bureaucracy.

Instead of coaxing the Texas Department of Transportation to conduct traffic studies in hopes that local road improvements will join a long waiting list, projects backed by local officials can get a green light from RMAs formed by individual counties or partner counties.

The Smith/Gregg RMA has six local trustees, three from each county. They expect Perry to appoint a chairperson. Once a board is in place, the local mobility authority will be empowered to plan and build local highways.

The first, all involved agree, will be the outer loop around Tyler, giving folks such as Nichols in Jacksonville an alternative route to Tyler/Pounds Regional Airport. Drivers coming from the south now use Texas 69, which becomes Broadway Boulevard inside Tyler and frequently backs up.

"I can get to (the Tyler city limit) quicker than I can get from that point to the airport," Nichols said.

The outer loop, he said, will form the first leg of the East Texas Hourglass, a figure-eight that eventually will link outer loops around Tyler and Longview. That, in turn, could one day link to I-69 north of Marshall, Gregg County Judge Bill Stoudt says.

"It's a big deal, and I hope I'm alive 25 years from now to see the fruit," Stoudt said. "This will be one of the major things that takes place in the evolution of East Texas in the next 25 years."

Like the old turnpike and beltway authorities, Regional Mobility Authorities will pay for new roads with tolls, at least partially. That gets under some taxpayers' skin, but Stoudt and Nichols noted that there always will be a free route to a driver's destination. It's likely to have traffic lights and longer drive times than the toll route.

"There might be all these things you don't want to deal with," Stoudt said. "But it will be free."

Northeast Texas needs the Hourglass, Stoudt said, to accommodate 100,000 Houston and Dallas/Fort Worth residents retiring every year and looking for a more rural setting for their golden years.

He said the ability to take out loans to build projects now will take up the slack left by budget cuts to state and federal highway spending. The local mobility authority also will take the area beyond road-building to meet rail and air needs that could emerge in coming years.

"The role of the RMA is going to be versatile," he said. "We're going to be talking about higher-speed rail, we're going to be talking about major projects. We can use it for expansion of the airports. ... I believe it's going to be here to stay."

"A direct quote from the Governor's office, from this thread's article. Now that you've been alerted to it, please stop spreading the lie that Cintra will charge whatever it wants, without the state having to approve it."

That's EXACTLY what they promised in Canada, and I have the links to prove it. It was a lie. So the WORDS of politicians often don't reflect the realities of their actions.

I know that my postings bother you. But until I see state law changed, or the actual contract, I will continue to point this out - but I will also now include Mr. Black's "promise".

You see these clowns in Austin are a moving target. At one time they say one thing, another time they say something else. We both have more than enough out of them to support our respective positions...which should tell everyone a lot about the quality of thought behind this whole TTC plan.

Ya know, you've previously implied that I had a financial interest, and I previously gave you a lengthy rebuttal about how that is not the case, and why I support the project. But like a lot of the critics, you seem to try and recycle your innendo and smears on new threads. Some would consider that dishonest.

Or maybe you think I'm lying. You certainly have the right to go through life thinking everyone is a con artist and out to defraud you, but that doesn't enhance your credibility. The TTC hasn't changed their sales pitch (IIRC, it was on a previous thread that we argued on that I had mentioned their discussion of the royalty concept), but apparently there are some concepts and details that haven't put forth as a term of agreement until after it had been agreed upon in negotiation. That's not some nefarious conspiracy, but rather prudent practice, because you don't put something out as a fact while it is still being negotiated. Royalties were one of many concepts considered as ways of enhancing landowner compensation and addressing concerns of the concessionaire profiting without any windfall going to the landowners. And now that apparently the royalties aspect has been agreed to in negotiations, they are talking about it. BTW, as mentioned in the article, the landowner also has the option of simply taking a Fair Market Value payment. But once again, some critics just cannot comprehend the concept of 'choices', since it doesn't fit with their soundbites.

Its not the TTC that is changing their pitch to anything that sticks...

"For the 1000th time, what part of 'choice' do you have trouble comprehending? No one will force you to drive an inch of those roads."

For my 10000th time, I'm simply waiting to see either the state law that protects me (me being the state-owned roads) get passed and signed, or the contract, with Cintra, that protects me get signed and fully released.

I have seen neither, so I will continue to alert others as to Cintra's behavior in other parts of North America.

In other words, as long as MY highways are threatened, I will speak up. There are other governors around the country toying with this insanity, and people in other states, as well as Texas, need to know exactly what's in store for them unless they keep vigilant (which did not happen in Canada).

You are far too versed in the details of TTC to be just an outside observer with a casual interest in the plan. Clearly you describe the workings of TTC negotiations like an insider (at least a mid-level manager at TxDot working on this project.)

You brought up the money issue. I just said that you must have a vested interest in TTC. So what is your financial interest in TTC? :)

Clearly you describe the workings of TTC negotiations like an insider (at least a mid-level manager at TxDot working on this project.)

That's laughable. All I did was surmise that details are coming out slowly because they aren't released until they are negotiated. Simple common sense.

You are far too tinfoil minded. The only info I've gotten on the TTC is from the internet, and I went to one of the meetings and picked up their info packets, of which the maps were the only thing of real value. There is plenty of info out there, it just requires some research. Sorry to disappoint, but I have neither inside info, nor access to such. Try researching beyond activist hype that reinforces your initial opinion. You might learn something.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.