Posted on 05/26/2006 11:42:32 AM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
AUSTIN -- Companies that are willing to pay for the right to build toll roads in Texas should have wide latitude to decide where they're built, state officials told Metroplex leaders Thursday.
New evidence of the state's move to privatize roads was on display Thursday, when members of the Texas Transportation Commission said they will not pressure the private consortium Cintra Zachry to build the Trans-Texas Corridor closer to Dallas-Fort Worth.
About 100 North Texas elected officials and business leaders had traveled to Austin to ask the commission to force Cintra Zachry to build the highway as a loop around Dallas-Fort Worth. But the commission refused.
"If you aggressively invite the private sector to be your partner, you can't tell them where to build the road," commission Chairman Ric Williamson of Weatherford said.
Cintra Zachry, a combination of companies from Spain and San Antonio hired by the state, plans to have the Trans-Texas toll road bypass the Metroplex to the east of Dallas. Cintra Zachry has said it can build the $6 billion highway with private money -- no gas-tax dollars -- and pay the state a $1.2 billion concession fee for the right to collect tolls for 50 years.
The Dallas portion could be built by 2015. A toll road and freight rail line around the west side of Fort Worth would be added several years later.
But Metroplex officials are concerned that the project would cause leapfrog development outside the Metroplex and drain jobs away from the urban core. The outer loop would make it easier to incorporate the toll road into the region's freeway plans, said Michael Morris, transportation director for the North Central Texas Council of Governments.
After the exchange with Williamson, North Texas leaders said they plan to meet with Cintra Zachry engineers to share statistics. They say Metroplex freight companies would rather have the toll road follow Interstate 35, 35E and 35W more closely.
Morris' office has proposed that the highway be built in a more or less straight north-south line from San Antonio through Austin and Waco to Mansfield, where it would connect with an outer loop. Those wishing to go through the Metroplex could connect with a proposed Texas 360 toll road in Mansfield.
The proposal could shorten the project by 60 miles and save Cintra Zachry $1.9 billion, Morris said.
"It isn't the public and private sector operating in a vacuum," Morris said during the meeting. "We don't think we're asking the private sector to do something that's foreign to them."
But Cintra Zachry officials have consistently said the most profitable path for a toll road would steer clear of the Metroplex.
Despite the Trans-Texas disagreement, state and local officials agreed to support one another in plans for toll roads, express toll lanes and freight- and passenger-rail lines. The state is expected to experience an $86 billion highway-funding shortfall through 2030.
Those appearing on behalf of the Metroplex included developer Ross Perot Jr.; Pete Rickershauer, vice president of BNSF Railway; and Fort Worth Mayor Mike Moncrief. The North Texas group, known informally as Dallas-Fort Worth Partners in Mobility, meets annually with the commission to discuss plans to reduce Metroplex gridlock and build roads, despite a chronic funding shortfall.
The Trans-Texas Corridor will be the subject of more than 50 public hearings statewide this summer, although the Texas Department of Transportation, not Cintra Zachry, is guiding that process.
Also Thursday, the North Texas group called for lawmakers to stop diverting about a quarter of the state's gas-tax revenue to education and instead spend that money on relieving gridlock.
Trans-Texas Corridor PING!
Seriously not trying to hijack this, but I've been saying this a while; we wouldn't need these new roads if we'd send all the illegals on a one way ride on a southbound road.
BTTT
Bump.
Agreed. I think this is just another example of our government paving the way (sorry for the pun) for the Mexicans to flood into our country. The immigration hearings just made the intent become crystal clear.
Yes we would. We have a high rate of in migration from other states, foreign countries (legal) and a much lower than average loss of existing residents. In fact we've got 2 of the 6 fastest growing metro areas in the country. I'd direct you to the census for substantiation, but I seriously doubt facts are going to sway your (and others here) urban myth spamming, so why bother.
And exactly how would this new road accomplish that? Be specific.
With these illegals willing to walk for days in the desert, do you really think that being able to shorten the trip from Laredo to Dallas by a few hours is going to be their deciding factor in whether to come north? If this road is primarily for illegal aliens, why is the first section only being built from San Antonio to north of Dallas (finished around 2015), while the Laredo-San Antonio portion isn't going to be built until probably at least 2025?
I wonder, if we can't get the state to properly maintain and improve the I-35, how will we be able to get the private company to properly maintain the tollroad when it gets to be 20 years old?
This looks to be the watershed moment in which I will, for the first time, NOT vote for a Republican, after over two decades of consistency. That honor will be due to Rick Perry, thanks to this whole pro-Mexico, trans-corridor mess. Just what we need, some super-artery to Mexico, when what we need is a FENCE. No, I plan to likely just leave the ballot for governor empty come this November (the other candidates seem too flakey). I'll support my Republican representative, though.
Lost in all of this is a little thing called eminent domain - the "Republican" leadership, in its race to privatize and turn all of the major roads into toll roads, doesn't bring up a dirty little fact - a lot of Texans are going to lose land one way or another, whether they want to or not, and it will end up in the hands of other private businesses.
Aren’t illegals undercounted in each census?
Probably by the stipulation in the state's concession agreement that the state can cancel that agreement at any time (though they have to buy out the investment made by the toll company not yet recouped by tolls collected to date.) So it is in the toll company's interest to maintain it enough so that too many drivers don't start diverting to other routes and/or the state doesn't take over.
How does this road increase the number illegal aliens? Especially since the first portion built is only from San Antonio to north of Dallas? Be specific.
In fact it has nothing whatsoever to do with the fence. 2 separate issues.
But E.D. would also be required and used if the state built the road. The land ownership will remain with the state, the private company just is awarded construction and operating rights (50 years, subject to cancellation and buyout at the state's discretion.) The state could just as easily (though not as financially beneficial to taxpayers) set up a gov't toll agency (like in Houston) to build and operate this road. So are you also against contracting out to private firms other gov't services and building projects such as trash collection or jails?
Fair enough, but I was thinking more of the births, in-migration, and out-migration stats broken down by ethnicity. Add up all the non-Latino groups and you still get a heck of a lot (the majority) of growth in TX.
We did vote on, and approved, a constitutional amendment allowing for such tolling after much debate in the prior legislative session. This wasn't a topic snuck through out of the blue.
It isn't double-taxation for a couple of reasons:
1) The gas tax (even after returning the 1/3rd that is shamefully siphoned off for education) doesn't come close to funding all the maintenance and new road projects the state needs. It barely covers maintenance right now, partly because inflation has raised costs while the tax amount hasn't risen. We benefit by inflation shrinking the bite of the tax, but it also reduces the funds available for roads.
2) These tolls are for new roads only, or new expansion of existing roads (with the existing portions remaining free.) So no one currently using a route will have to pay to use it, and people will have the CHOICE of whether to pay the toll on the new roads.
That is actually a more conservative approach to funding, because instead of everyone being forced to pay a tax for something they may not want or use, only those who actually want to use this road will pay for it. The risk for cost overruns also shifts from the gov't to the toll firm's investors, who are making a calculated risk that enough persons will see the tolls worthy of the faster or more direct trip.
So, finally, TXDOT admits who is really in charge of the Trash-Texas Conjob -- a foreign (non-U.S. and non-Texas) company!!!
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.