Filmmaker captures toll road opposition

San Antonio Express-News ^ | October 6, 2006 | Patrick Driscoll

[BobL]

Neat stuff with the link - thanks again:

Here's one for everybody:

"Mr. Saenz stated that this agreement is a transfer of risk from the State to the developer. The State will receive $25 million up front. Revenue sharing of tolls collected will begin at 5% and increase at agreed upon usage levels up to 50%. Revenues generated from this facility remain in the local TxDOT districts (San Antonio and Austin) to be used for local projects. It was stated that TxDOT will be working with the local MPOs on such projects."

Interesting - It now looks like the stuff all of you Perry supporters said about paying for the roads we drive on was simply BULLSHIITE. It looks likes these highways are going to be used as a piggy bank for politicians to fund their own local pet projects. I was always wondering where all of the extra toll money would go - now we know.

[BobL]

"Hahhahhah. You seem to have ignored that part about I 35 being excluded from the non compete clause."

Where's my link to the contract???

Politicians in Canada lied through the teeth with Cintra - I'll believe it when I see the contract.

[Ben Ficklin]

That is the whole point. The money goes directly to the local/regional authority so Austin can't get their hands on it.

When the locals get the money, they can build you a free road.

[BobL]

"Hahhahhah. You seem to have ignored that part about I 35 being excluded from the non compete clause."

So you're implying that Cintra is stupid enough to sign a contract that leaves them open to a new governor wiping them out by widening I-35 to 8 or 10 lanes and keeping it as a freeway. Maybe you think that, but I have more respect for that company and I really don't think that they'd be that stupid.

All we need is a link to the contract to settle matters.

[deport]

Just curious..... would you prefer taxes be raised for future projects in the San Antonio/Austin area or let a portion of the tolls be used for future road expansions?

I prefer the pay as you ride plan as opposed to increased taxes.....

[1rudeboy]

We don't need toll roads, and they will be a bane--like HOV lanes, like light rail--sucking up money like vampires.

You might be new to these threads, so let me fill you in. One of the primary contentions against the road is that it will be privately-operated.

[BobL]

"That is the whole point. The money goes directly to the local/regional authority so Austin can't get their hands on it."

New story, ehhh. You have to be careful what you link to.

So it seems that you're agreeing that drivers on these toll roads will get FLEECED, so as to pay for local projects. That's what Harris County is now doing with some of their toll money - even though they PROMISED to make the tollways free after being paid off.

So you seem ok with people getting a free ride if they don't use the toll roads. Seems to me it was more fair with a gas tax, when we all paid to drive.

[Ben Ficklin]

"Where's my link to the contract???"

I didn't take you to raise. Now that I have showed you how wipe your own butt, you can look it up on Google.

[MamaTexan]

We are taxed out the whazoo now--why don't we demand more efficient use of the taxes that are collected?

Why don't we use some of the money the State already has sitting in the bank to build our roads?

Here's some 2003 stats. I wonder how much it is now?

The State of Texas has approximately $53.77 billion of the taxpayer's money it is not using

[BobL]

"Just curious..... would you prefer taxes be raised for future projects in the San Antonio/Austin area or let a portion of the tolls be used for future road expansions?

I prefer the pay as you ride plan as opposed to increased taxes....."

Good question: No, I would prefer that the gas tax get back to where it was, in real terms, some 10 to 15 years ago, and not diverting some of the money. (and yes - you can look at it as an increase, if you choose to ignore inflation) The gas tax is simply the most fair tax for driving. If you drive - you pay, regardless of the road. Even in the boonies, people still drive on state highways - it works out very fair.

The plan for Texas, as it now appears from the link that Ben was kind enough to give us, is to use tolling to push as many cars and trucks as possible off of limited access highways and on to streets - rather than keeping a balance. Maybe you guys like that (or desperately need Perry re-elected), but it really does not seem to make any sense to me - and these 50 year contracts (that I'm still owed a link on) have the potential to cripple the state for generations.

Is this really smart?

[BobL]

"Now that I have showed you how wipe your own butt"

Hmmm, getting a bit personal here. You wouldn't be 'friends' with that Foley guy, would you?

[Ben Ficklin]

Its time for you to grow up, to stop depending on other people to look up things for you and pay for your ride.

[1rudeboy]

I really don't see how a toll road that doesn't exist yet will "push" cars and trucks off of it onto existing roads.

[BobL]

"Its time for you to grow up..."

GET A LIFE!! You are the one forcing this system on the state, not me. You should be selling it.

But you can keep attacking me if it makes you feel better.


By the way, where's that link to the contract???

[deport]

As far as a final contract on Segments 5-6 of SH 130 you may have to wait a few months yet as I don't think one has been signed. I believe the final is awaiting environmental clearances from the Feds, etc since this portion of SH 130 wasn't ready for construction due to lack of monies by the state. I may be wrong on that but I think I read that some place.

[1rudeboy]

As far as I can gather, the concern is that a portion of the tolls collected from the drivers using the road will be misdirected, and the solution appears to be to raise taxes on everyone that uses the road or not.

[Koblenz]

I am not against toll roads, or gas taxes for that matter, under the following circumstances:

All tolls and taxes collected are used for roads and road-releated stuff. Paying down bonds for roads built, maintaining existing roads, and extra costs incurred by emergency services due to the roads' existence.

On the opposite, no non-road taxes collected go to maintaining roads.

Toll collection can be done efficiently, meaning no more than 5 minutes to collect my toll under the worse circumstances.

If possible, tolls should vary by time of day to encourage people to shift their driving to non peak times.

[BobL]

"I really don't see how a toll road that doesn't exist yet will "push" cars and trucks off of it onto existing roads."

Please read my post more carefully - I was referring to the future plan. And yes, tolls, particularly if they are as confiscatory as planned (i.e., to fund Ben and everyone else who wants to drive for free on surface streets), will push people off of these roads.

The idea to PREVENT this stupid dynamic from taking place, rather than leave it to the next generation of politicians to clean up Perry's mess.

[BobL]

Thanks - then it looks as though the contract itself cannot be looked at prior to the election.

Hmmm, I wonder what the Gov and his supporters are afraid of.

[1rudeboy]

It's mildly interesting that you consider someone making a (presumably) rational economic choice (to use the tollroad or not) as being "pushed" upon you. Is the source some sort of sense of entitlement?