Texas Landowners Protest Superhighway Plan

nbc5i.com ^ | September 30, 2006 | nbc5i.com

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

FORT WORTH, Texas -- Protestors turned out across the state Saturday to voice their concerns about the multi-billion dollar Trans-Texas corridor.

The 4,000-mile highway is being developed, in part, to relieve traffic on Interstate 35.

The corridor would be three times wider than the average highway, wide enough for cars, trucks and trains. It would also be used as a route for utility lines.

However, not everyone supports the plan for a highway that would run from Mexico to Oklahoma, because in order to make this ambitious project a reality the state will have to take land through eminent domain.

“Many people realize this is a rip off of Texas citizens and we're doing our best to stop it,” said Russ Russell of Grapevine.

Protestors say people shouldn't have to give up land that has been in their families for generations.

“The people are entitled to their land and their homes,” Arlington resident Jerry Pikulinski said.

But it’s not just the land that's an issue, said Tarrant county resident Beth Kisor.

“I am very disturbed about roads being taken after they've been paid for by taxes and become toll roads.”

Still North Texas transportation leaders support the project saying if the infrastructure isn't improved, the Texas economy will decline.

[af_vet_rr]

The 4,000-mile highway is being developed, in part, to relieve traffic on Interstate 35.

Except for that bit about a lot of people in the US, Canada, and Mexico, wanting it to be part of a huge corridor running from Mexico City up into Canada.

[1rudeboy]

Boy, the term "in part" really threw you off, didn't it?

[af_vet_rr]

I do see opposition build to this road rapidly.

It has been building for a long time. Semi-related issues such as the massive growth of toll roads have also generated interest. There's also a lot of talk of private businesses (hotels, gas stations, etc.), being able to push through Eminent Domain to grab land from private land owners (i.e. one private entity getting the government to take land from another private entity and give it to them).

The sad thing - if this was under a Democrat Governor, many people would be against it (especially with the heavy involvement of foreign companies), but because it's not, a lot of people have this mentality of "oh, it's okay, it's our side pushing this".

I've even heard the pols say it'll cut down travel times between some of the larger cities, and I'm thinking "how is me going twenty miles out of my way to get on it, and then getting off of it and driving another twenty miles going to change things? it's already added a good 40 miles to the length of my trip as it is".

[Dudoight]

He didn't say they were hired. He said he was against giving the contract to foreign companies, he would like it to go to US companies.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

You've been added.

[Tenyaka]

Yes, but his hair looks good.

[af_vet_rr]

Related thread:
WASHINGTON – While several members of Congress have denied any knowledge of efforts to build "NAFTA superhighways" or move America closer to a union with Mexico and Canada, four members of the House have stepped up to sponsor a resolution opposing both initiatives.

Rep. Virgil Goode Jr., R-Va., has introduced a resolution – H.R. 487 – designed to express "the sense of Congress that the United States should not engage in the construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Superhighway System or enter into a North American Union (NAU) with Mexico and Canada."

[1rudeboy]

There's also a lot of talk of private businesses (hotels, gas stations, etc.), being able to push through Eminent Domain to grab land from private land owners . . . .

[sigh]

Gov. Perry Signs New Law Protecting Property Rights
Texas Senate clarifies eminent domain law

[Tenyaka]

The government has yet to make a good case to the people on this one. On the surface you say "good, a new highway" then you look at the contractors involved, the bypassing of many Texas towns, etc. and you start to smell the stench.

[Hydroshock]

And the more people find out the more disliek this plan.

[Hydroshock]

So, Gov Goodhair's cronies are still taking land away from these people for a private busines.

[Dudoight]

Yes. Kinky has weighed in on this. He is against giving the contract to foreign companies.

I am not sure where he stands on the actual building of the TTC.

It seems to me that the TTC is part of a plan that is national in scope. I don't think there is one durned thing we can do about it. This will eminent domain one heck of a lot of people's lands.

[1rudeboy]

By private, you mean that only Cintra employees will be permitted to use the roadway?

[deport]

the bypassing of many Texas towns,

---

Thank goodness. Isn't that the purpose of a long haul, limited access road?.... Get around the congestion of towns and move on down the line.

[af_vet_rr]

Boy, the term "in part" really threw you off, didn't it?

Not at all, I just happen to think that traffic congestion on I-35 or any other road is a very minor part of this (even though it's pushed as the major reason). They talk about removing traffic that is going back and forth between Canada and Mexico from I-35 (at least in Texas), but that doesn't address the fact that they could remove 20% of the I-35 traffic, and yet because of the growth along I-35 (it won't be too long before San Antonio to Austin To Waco will be solid development), that 20% savings will be gone very quickly.

When you look at the politicians who are pushing the concept of international (although it might not be international within a few decades at the rate we are going) corridors, these are pretty much the same people who are big backers of the TTC, and the TTC is always a component of the international corridors when they are discussed.

Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against the flow of goods back and forth between nations, however I think that we are being given a bill of sale for something that we weren't intending to buy - we are being sold something that is a "solution" to traffic on certain roads, when it really appears to be a major leg of something much bigger, and doesn't address area growth along I-35.

That said, the people who should be just as concerned or more, are the people in Oklahoma and Kansas, because once serious construction and progress is made on the TTC, the people in Oklahoma and Kansas will be told "The TTC is dumping all of this traffic right on your doorstep, causing you problems, therefore you all need some huge corridors moving this traffic right on through"

[Hydroshock]

A private company will own and operate this road. They are using ED to take land from people for the use of a private business.

[Ben Ficklin]

Review reply ten.

If you don't know the difference between give and award, you need to find out.

So what we know about Kinky now is that he is lying about how Cintra was awarded the contract and he favors "set-a-sides".

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

As I understand it, the new law exempts Trans-Texas Corridor activities from its eminent domain restrictions.

[1rudeboy]

Yet the public will use the roadway. So it's not as "private" as you think.

[dljordan]

Looks like the perfect invasion route for the Chinese army.