On March 19, a Select Committee of the Texas House of Representatives heard testimony on whether certain transportation projects are suitable to receive Federal stimulus funds.
Thanks to Mary Anderson and Bruce Burton of Texans Against Tolls; Roger Baker, transportation analyst; Vince May, Elgin resident who has been active on this issue; and Mel Borel of TURF for testifying AGAINST using the stimulus funds to begin turning 290 East into a toll road.
Whatever your thoughts on whether there should be the stimulus fund program or not, I think that most of us can agree that if funds are going to be spent anyway, they should not be spent to force us to pay more money to drive to work on 290 E. Especially galling is that one of the priorities of the stimulus funds is to help economically disadvantaged areas. Using the funds to begin tolling the residents east of Austin will hurt an economically disadvantaged area.
You can email comments to the Select Committee Clerk at valerie.pizana@house.state.tx.us
Representative Jim Dunnam is the Chairman of the Select Committee, and you can email comments to his Chief of Staff at jenny.casey@house.state.tx.us
The Federal government has a website where you can leave comments if you think the stimulus funds are being misused—recovery.gov.
The comment form is here:
http://www.recovery.gov/?q=content/contact
The site says: “The job of the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board is to make sure that Recovery.gov fulfills its mandate—to help citizens track the spending of funds allocated by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The Board consists of Inspectors General from about ten major cabinet agencies—including the Departments of Justice, Treasury, and Commerce—and one of its duties will be to review the comments and questions submitted to the site. Though the Board has not yet met, please feel free to submit your comments and questions below, and they will be gathered to present to the Board upon its first meeting.”
Here is the letter that I have emailed to the above offices:
"I watched the March 19 committee hearing online and would like to submit some comments to the Committee. I’m especially concerned about using stimulus funds that are supposed to help the economically disadvantaged to begin a toll project that will punish the surrounding economically disadvantaged residents.
"I am referring to the 290 E/183 flyovers. As reported, the CTRMA will get $90 million of stimulus money for this project. These flyovers are the west end of what they are calling the “Manor Expressway,” which will be tolled. Eventually, the tollway will run from these flyovers on the west to past the SH 130 toll road on the east—five or six miles. Then, in future years, tolling possibly will continue toward the east through Manor and on out 290 E toward or to Elgin.
"The Eastern Travis County/Manor area is a lower income area with many residents who have no disposable income to PAY EXTRA just to commute to work. I think that using stimulus funds to begin this toll project is just the OPPOSITE of what is intended. The federal government has asked to use the funds to HELP the economically disadvantaged. Using stimulus funds to begin the 290 E tollway will HURT the economically disadvantaged.
"Turning the FREE lanes on 290 E into TOLL lanes is NOT NEEDED either for increasing traffic demand or for safety. You heard from Roger Baker, who has done much research over the years into transportation projects. I hope he provided you with written information, but to quote him briefly, 'Recent improvements to US 183 and also SH 130 have both REDUCED TRAVEL DEMAND on SH 290 E. The official TxDOT traffic counts thus indicate a DECRASING need to build this $623 million toll road in order to solve identifiable congestion problems.'
"Regarding traffic safety, Roger reported about the data he received from TxDOT for the sections where they would build the 290 E toll road, 'This knocks the props out from under the CTRMA/CAMPO theory that justifies rebuilding 290 E as a $623 million toll road in order to resolve worsening safety problems. You have to go back to 2003 to find a year as safe as 2008. As the traffic counts have gone down and travel has diverted to SH 130 and 183, the need for a 290 E toll road has DECREASED—in terms of both volumes and safety.'
2003—57 total crashes
2004—87
2005—103
2006—117
2007—95
2008—78
"I hope that your Committee will do whatever is in its power to try to stop this injustice that is about to be perpetrated on the people who happen to live on the east side of Austin through a program that is supposed to be helping them. Indeed, I believe that using these Federal funds for an economically unjust purpose would violate Title VI that is supposed to prohibit such
things."
Showing posts with label stimulus funds. Show all posts
Showing posts with label stimulus funds. Show all posts
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Monday, March 9, 2009
Transportation Commission NOT using stimulus funds where most needed
Ben Wear has coverage of the tolled "Manor Expressway" flyovers that will be built with the stimulus funds that are supposed to be going to help people and the economy:
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/03/09/0309wear.html
"Q: I saw that $90 million of federal stimulus money will be used to build four flyover bridges connecting U.S. 290 and U.S. 183. Wouldn't it make more sense to use that money for flyovers at U.S. 183 and Interstate 35, or 290 and MoPac Boulevard? Isn't there more traffic at those places?
"A: Well yes, there is more traffic and missing flyovers at several other locations around town. The interstate has almost 250,000 cars a day at U.S. 183, which has 84,000 cars a day there, according to Texas Department of Transportation counts, and there are only two "direct connectors" there. It's the same at MoPac/U.S. 290 — two flyovers — with MoPac having 110,000 cars a day and U.S. 290 with 80,000 cars a day. At 183/290, by contrast, U.S. 183 has 50,000 cars a day and U.S. 290 has 43,000 cars a day.
"The key difference: tolls. The 183/290 interchange will be the west entry to and exit from what will be a toll road within three years, and the plan is to charge a 25-cent to 50-cent toll on the flyover bridges.
"The Texas Transportation Commission controlled the stimulus purse and, as evidenced by two-thirds of the $1.2 billion for new roads going to tollways, they had a clear preference."
If you follow the link, you can see several reader comments criticizing the stimulus funds going to this toll project.
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/03/09/0309wear.html
"Q: I saw that $90 million of federal stimulus money will be used to build four flyover bridges connecting U.S. 290 and U.S. 183. Wouldn't it make more sense to use that money for flyovers at U.S. 183 and Interstate 35, or 290 and MoPac Boulevard? Isn't there more traffic at those places?
"A: Well yes, there is more traffic and missing flyovers at several other locations around town. The interstate has almost 250,000 cars a day at U.S. 183, which has 84,000 cars a day there, according to Texas Department of Transportation counts, and there are only two "direct connectors" there. It's the same at MoPac/U.S. 290 — two flyovers — with MoPac having 110,000 cars a day and U.S. 290 with 80,000 cars a day. At 183/290, by contrast, U.S. 183 has 50,000 cars a day and U.S. 290 has 43,000 cars a day.
"The key difference: tolls. The 183/290 interchange will be the west entry to and exit from what will be a toll road within three years, and the plan is to charge a 25-cent to 50-cent toll on the flyover bridges.
"The Texas Transportation Commission controlled the stimulus purse and, as evidenced by two-thirds of the $1.2 billion for new roads going to tollways, they had a clear preference."
If you follow the link, you can see several reader comments criticizing the stimulus funds going to this toll project.
Sunday, March 8, 2009
Perry-appointed flunky calls citizen "bigot"--entire testimony
Bill Molina of Storm Pictures has created a wonderful video of Hank Gilbert testifying before the Transportation Commission, where Perry-appointed Houghton felt free to call a testifying citizen a "bigot." Here is the link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8HtyJXsNcY
Seeing Hank make his points calmly and rationally--valuable. Seeing the expressions on the faces of the commissioners--priceless!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8HtyJXsNcY
Seeing Hank make his points calmly and rationally--valuable. Seeing the expressions on the faces of the commissioners--priceless!
Thursday, March 5, 2009
"Bigots" are those who would oppress Manor commuters
Thanks to Bruce Burton and Texans Against Tolls for sending around this link. http://www.kxan.com/dpp/news/txdot_makes_plans_for_stimulus_money
Here, you can see the coverage of today's Texas Transportation Commission meeting, where they approved the list of Texas transportation projects to get the stimulus funds. The most expensive project in our area is flyovers at 290 East and 183, intended to be the west end of tolling 290 East, the "Manor Expressway."
The stimulus funds were supposed to help economically disadvantaged areas--this project will be the beginning of further oppression of an economically disadvantaged community in Eastern Travis County that cannot afford the additional burden of paying tolls to commute to work.
As transportation analyst Roger Baker says, "290 E had seen stagnant . . . user demand. It had to be combined with 183 A to keep it financially viable. . . . Starting the 290 E toll road project at one end will help keep it alive as a project, but it still needs a lot of additional federal TIFIA loans, plus big private bond loans to build the rest of the road. Bottom line: it's a waste of money to widen a road that ain't broke when you look at the numbers. It's pure road lobby pork."
MEMBER OF TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION INSULTS CITIZEN
The KXAN video shows Hank Gilbert testifying. Hank is one of the founders of TURF and was the Democratic candidate for Ag Commissioner in 2006, drawing the most votes of any Democratic state-wide candidate. For some strange reason, Commissioner Houghton decides to call Hank and his TURF group "bigots." It seems to me that the "bigots" are the Transportation Commissioners who use our taxpayer stimulus funds to cause even further economic distress to the Manor-area commuters.
Here, you can see the coverage of today's Texas Transportation Commission meeting, where they approved the list of Texas transportation projects to get the stimulus funds. The most expensive project in our area is flyovers at 290 East and 183, intended to be the west end of tolling 290 East, the "Manor Expressway."
The stimulus funds were supposed to help economically disadvantaged areas--this project will be the beginning of further oppression of an economically disadvantaged community in Eastern Travis County that cannot afford the additional burden of paying tolls to commute to work.
As transportation analyst Roger Baker says, "290 E had seen stagnant . . . user demand. It had to be combined with 183 A to keep it financially viable. . . . Starting the 290 E toll road project at one end will help keep it alive as a project, but it still needs a lot of additional federal TIFIA loans, plus big private bond loans to build the rest of the road. Bottom line: it's a waste of money to widen a road that ain't broke when you look at the numbers. It's pure road lobby pork."
MEMBER OF TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION INSULTS CITIZEN
The KXAN video shows Hank Gilbert testifying. Hank is one of the founders of TURF and was the Democratic candidate for Ag Commissioner in 2006, drawing the most votes of any Democratic state-wide candidate. For some strange reason, Commissioner Houghton decides to call Hank and his TURF group "bigots." It seems to me that the "bigots" are the Transportation Commissioners who use our taxpayer stimulus funds to cause even further economic distress to the Manor-area commuters.
Monday, March 2, 2009
TxDOT to misuse stimulus funds on toll roads
EXCERPTS FROM HOUSTON CHRONICLE ARTICLE Feb. 27, 2009
Houston Chronicle by ROSANNA RUIZ http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/hotstories/6285483.html
$700 million eyed for toll projectsGrand Parkway's among 21 Texas roadways where money will be spent
Texas Department of Transportation has set aside more than $700 million in economic stimulus funds for toll road projects across the state, sparking criticism and questions about whether the pay-to-drive roads are an appropriate use of the federal dollars.
“It’s a total rip-off,” said Terri Hall, director of Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom, a nonprofit opposed to toll roads. “That’s not how the money is supposed to be used.”
The discussion should be on reducing gridlock now, said Rep. Jim Dunnam, D-Waco, whose criticism led the commission to postpone its vote. Toll roads should be built later with state money, not onetime federal stimulus funds, he said. “The Legislature continues to vote for toll moratoriums,” he said, “and TxDOT keeps ignoring us.”
U.S. Rep. Pete Olson, R-Sugar Land, who sits on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, also questioned the use of stimulus funds on toll roads. “It concerns me that state officials would prioritize toll projects that will hit already hard-pressed Texas drivers with additional fees,” he said in an e-mailed statement. “I would like to see stimulus dollars fund projects that ease not only congestion, but an over-taxed public as well.”
Houston Chronicle by ROSANNA RUIZ http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/hotstories/6285483.html
$700 million eyed for toll projectsGrand Parkway's among 21 Texas roadways where money will be spent
Texas Department of Transportation has set aside more than $700 million in economic stimulus funds for toll road projects across the state, sparking criticism and questions about whether the pay-to-drive roads are an appropriate use of the federal dollars.
“It’s a total rip-off,” said Terri Hall, director of Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom, a nonprofit opposed to toll roads. “That’s not how the money is supposed to be used.”
The discussion should be on reducing gridlock now, said Rep. Jim Dunnam, D-Waco, whose criticism led the commission to postpone its vote. Toll roads should be built later with state money, not onetime federal stimulus funds, he said. “The Legislature continues to vote for toll moratoriums,” he said, “and TxDOT keeps ignoring us.”
U.S. Rep. Pete Olson, R-Sugar Land, who sits on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, also questioned the use of stimulus funds on toll roads. “It concerns me that state officials would prioritize toll projects that will hit already hard-pressed Texas drivers with additional fees,” he said in an e-mailed statement. “I would like to see stimulus dollars fund projects that ease not only congestion, but an over-taxed public as well.”
Info from Independent Texans about March 3 Lobby Day
Here's a good explanation of TURF's Lobby Day from Linda Curtis, Independent Texans. Linda includes brief talking points for people to use in visiting legislators in person, or if you can't get there in person, use these talking points in letters (best), emails, or calls to your legislators.
Dear Friends & Members:
Question: Why is TxDOT in such a rush to obligate all $1.2 billion of the stimulus funds for Texas transportation by THIS THURSDAY?
Answer: $700 million of the package is dedicated to toll roads.
What's more, 1/4 of the transportation stimulus -- if TxDOT has its way -- will be for one project, the Grand Parkway in Houston -- a road to feed a new speculative development!
Note: TxDOT actually has 120 days to commit the first 50% of these funds, then another full 12 months for the remainder.
So what's the big rush? Well, you know...it's that rogue agency again -- TxDOT (and Rick Perry behind them). Need we say more?
IT IS URGENT THAT YOU CALL YOUR STATE LEGISLATORS MONDAY==Texas Independence Day!
IT IS URGENT (if you can) THAT YOU COME TO AUSTIN TO TURF'S LOBBY DAY --
join us on the South Steps of the Capital at 9:30 a.m.
Here's where you can find your legislators: http://www.fyi.legis.state.tx.us/TALKING POINTS (or you can make this in to your letter -- but personalize it please)
* FIX IT FIRST! No stimulus funds for toll roads! Stimulus funds for transportation should be used for where people are now, rather than new speculative developments like the Grand Parkway in Houston.
* No Trans-Texas Corridor -- really. Protect the blackland prairie, one of the richest farm soils in the world. Rick Perry changing the name is just more of the same trickery and dishonesty that Texans are fed up with.
* Raise funds for transportation in a fiscally responsible way -- index the gas tax rather than pushing privatized, more expensive and risky toll roads. Allow citizens to vote on toll roads for their area. Protect our pension funds -- do not invest them in risky privatized toll roads.
* Real eminent domain reform to protect Texans' property rights.
* Stop the plan for mandatory tagging of farm animals which favors big AG, rather than independent farms.
Independently yours,
Linda Curtis
Independent Texans
member of Texas Alliance for Reform
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Independent Texans' letter on stimulus funds
In some previous messages, I have warned about the possibility of the stimulus funds proposed by the incoming administration being “hijacked” by entities like Departments of Transportation and road contractor organizations for big new projects and public-private partnerships for the benefit of private corporations, rather than the original goal of infrastructure repair.
Linda Curtis, of Independent Texans, has created a letter with input from many Texas organizations that want any stimulus funds to be appropriately used. This letter has been sent to the transition team and many federal, state, and local officials. A big “Thank You” to Linda for many days of hard work in researching and writing this letter and rounding up a large group of signatories.
Here is the message and link to the letter from Linda:
To: indyfriends@lists.independenttexans.comFrom: ljcurtis@indytexans.orgDate: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:26:27 -0600Subject: [Indyfriends] Letter to the Transition Team & Congress on Texas Transportation
Dear Friends and Members:
Attached you will find a letter sent by 24 Texas based organizations, to the Obama Transition Team copied to the entire Texas Congressional Delegation. It urges caution and a careful review of the use of any stimulus funds for Texas transportation, in light of our on-going fight to stop the Trans-Texas Corridor and privatized toll plans of Gov. Rick Perry and his allies.
The letter is now parked at this site (and we have attached it below my signature):
http://www.indytexans.org/itblog/?cat=1
The recent statements by TxDOT officials and the Governor conceding a reduction in the Corridor's footprint (scaled back to 600 feet) and that no non-compete clauses will be allowed for privatized highways, remain to be realized in the next legislative session. What's more, we will not concede any land within one of the world's 3% most fertile soils -- the blackland prairie in Central Texas. Thousands of Texans who attended hearings near IH-35 have made plain that they can support a widening of IH-35, supported by TxDOT's own study in 1991 to help metro areas. TxDOT could have legitimately requested funds for that.
As you know, the Texas legislative session will begin next Tuesday, January 13th. It is now time for you to contact your US Congressional Representative, our two US Senators, Hutchison and Cornyn, and your Texas House and Senate representatives. Go to this link to pull up all of your reps:
http://www.fyi.legis.state.tx.us/
Call them, email them or write them a letter -- and ask your friends, family and members to do the same. Urge your reps to do all they can to ensure that stimulus funds only be used for transportation facilities which enjoy clear public support. The Trans-Texas Corridor, nor privatized toll facilities fit in to this category. They can request funds to widen IH-35.
Independently yours,
Linda Curtis
Independent Texans
http://IndyTexans.org
ljcurtis@IndyTexans.org
Linda Curtis, of Independent Texans, has created a letter with input from many Texas organizations that want any stimulus funds to be appropriately used. This letter has been sent to the transition team and many federal, state, and local officials. A big “Thank You” to Linda for many days of hard work in researching and writing this letter and rounding up a large group of signatories.
Here is the message and link to the letter from Linda:
To: indyfriends@lists.independenttexans.comFrom: ljcurtis@indytexans.orgDate: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:26:27 -0600Subject: [Indyfriends] Letter to the Transition Team & Congress on Texas Transportation
Dear Friends and Members:
Attached you will find a letter sent by 24 Texas based organizations, to the Obama Transition Team copied to the entire Texas Congressional Delegation. It urges caution and a careful review of the use of any stimulus funds for Texas transportation, in light of our on-going fight to stop the Trans-Texas Corridor and privatized toll plans of Gov. Rick Perry and his allies.
The letter is now parked at this site (and we have attached it below my signature):
http://www.indytexans.org/itblog/?cat=1
The recent statements by TxDOT officials and the Governor conceding a reduction in the Corridor's footprint (scaled back to 600 feet) and that no non-compete clauses will be allowed for privatized highways, remain to be realized in the next legislative session. What's more, we will not concede any land within one of the world's 3% most fertile soils -- the blackland prairie in Central Texas. Thousands of Texans who attended hearings near IH-35 have made plain that they can support a widening of IH-35, supported by TxDOT's own study in 1991 to help metro areas. TxDOT could have legitimately requested funds for that.
As you know, the Texas legislative session will begin next Tuesday, January 13th. It is now time for you to contact your US Congressional Representative, our two US Senators, Hutchison and Cornyn, and your Texas House and Senate representatives. Go to this link to pull up all of your reps:
http://www.fyi.legis.state.tx.us/
Call them, email them or write them a letter -- and ask your friends, family and members to do the same. Urge your reps to do all they can to ensure that stimulus funds only be used for transportation facilities which enjoy clear public support. The Trans-Texas Corridor, nor privatized toll facilities fit in to this category. They can request funds to widen IH-35.
Independently yours,
Linda Curtis
Independent Texans
http://IndyTexans.org
ljcurtis@IndyTexans.org
Monday, December 15, 2008
National Review article advises Obama to do like Rick Perry
The topic of Texas transportation and the stimulus package have been commented upon in National Review in an article called Wrong Road on Transportation, by Sam Staley and Adrian Moore. The general drift of the first part of the article is generally OK, about thinking of new and better ways to do transportation and using the stimulus funds in the best way to create needed jobs.
Then, they lurch right off the tracks when they come to specific recommendations.
Full article:
http://nrd.nationalreview.com/article/?q=MTk5OTgzMDllMjlhNzA5ZTM2OTI1NzFlNDEzODY3ZDk=
Then, they lurch right off the tracks when they come to specific recommendations.
Fortunately, we have the tools and the incentive to embrace the innovation necessary to reestablish the U.S. as a world leader in infrastructure investment. Many of President-elect Obama’s transportation advisers are poised to embrace many of these innovations, if they are appointed to key posts in the administration. Central to the reform efforts will be an expanded
role for technology and the private sector in providing new, high-quality infrastructure.Hundreds of billions of dollars are available worldwide for infrastructure investments in the U.S., an unintended but happy side-effect of the “flight to quality” brought about by the collapse of world financial markets. Experience in China, Australia, India, France, Spain, and elsewhere has demonstrated the importance of letting the private sector take the lead in proposing, developing, and implementing these solutions through long-term agreements with governments called public-private partnerships (PPPs).
Transportation policy may be one area where an Obama administration will leave a positive legacy for the nation and its cities. While Republican governors such as Rick Perry in Texas and Mitch Daniels in Indiana have staked out ambitious and politically courageous positions supporting PPPs . . .I say that fortunately, I hope, the Obama administration will not take the advice of National Review, and will not go down the road of Gov. 39%, attempting to use eminent domain to take land throughout the country for the benefit of foreign corporations such as Cintra.
Full article:
http://nrd.nationalreview.com/article/?q=MTk5OTgzMDllMjlhNzA5ZTM2OTI1NzFlNDEzODY3ZDk=
Saturday, December 13, 2008
David Brooks--don't use the stimulus to encourage sprawl
David Brooks has a column in the New York Times warning about the "new" Obama stimulus funds being used to further the "old" transportation modes, rather than developing new ways of transportation to help the new suburban centers that are developing and the urban centers that are being revitalized.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/09/opinion/09brooks.html
He speaks of the recent population dispersal, where "Forty-three million people moved every year, and basically they moved outward — from inner-ring suburbs to far-flung exurbs on the metro fringe."
He says that these people now realize they want closer community and social contacts, leading to a new trend: "Meeting places are popping up across the suburban landscape. There are restaurant and entertainment zones, mixed-use streetscape malls, suburban theater districts, farmers’ markets and concert halls. In addition, downtown areas in places like Charlotte and Dallas are reviving . . .
"If, indeed, we are going to have a once-in-a-half-century infrastructure investment, it would be great if the program would build on today’s emerging patterns. It would be great if Obama’s spending would actually encourage the clustering and leave a legacy that would be visible and beloved 50 years from now."
"To take advantage of the growing desire for community, the Obama plan would have to do two things. First, it would have to create new transportation patterns. . . Second, the Obama stimulus plan could help localities create suburban town squares."
"But alas, there’s no evidence so far that the Obama infrastructure plan is attached to any larger social vision. In fact, there is a real danger that the plan will retard innovation and entrench the past. . . . The quickest thing to do is simply throw money at things that already exist."
"Before the recession hit, we were enjoying a period of urban and suburban innovation. We could have been on the verge of a transportation revolution. It looks as if the Obama infrastructure plan may freeze that change, not fuel it."
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/09/opinion/09brooks.html
He speaks of the recent population dispersal, where "Forty-three million people moved every year, and basically they moved outward — from inner-ring suburbs to far-flung exurbs on the metro fringe."
He says that these people now realize they want closer community and social contacts, leading to a new trend: "Meeting places are popping up across the suburban landscape. There are restaurant and entertainment zones, mixed-use streetscape malls, suburban theater districts, farmers’ markets and concert halls. In addition, downtown areas in places like Charlotte and Dallas are reviving . . .
"If, indeed, we are going to have a once-in-a-half-century infrastructure investment, it would be great if the program would build on today’s emerging patterns. It would be great if Obama’s spending would actually encourage the clustering and leave a legacy that would be visible and beloved 50 years from now."
"To take advantage of the growing desire for community, the Obama plan would have to do two things. First, it would have to create new transportation patterns. . . Second, the Obama stimulus plan could help localities create suburban town squares."
"But alas, there’s no evidence so far that the Obama infrastructure plan is attached to any larger social vision. In fact, there is a real danger that the plan will retard innovation and entrench the past. . . . The quickest thing to do is simply throw money at things that already exist."
"Before the recession hit, we were enjoying a period of urban and suburban innovation. We could have been on the verge of a transportation revolution. It looks as if the Obama infrastructure plan may freeze that change, not fuel it."
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Kirk Watson on Central Texas transportation projects
Eye on Williamson has commentary on the stimulus package and Central Texas, including the difference of opinion between Sen. Kirk Watson and TxDOT about prioritizing projects. Comments plus excerpts from news articles and quotes from Watson are here:
http://eyeonwilliamson.org/?p=3498
http://eyeonwilliamson.org/?p=3498
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Another hint that the transportation powers that be want to get their hands on the Obama stimulus funds
Today's Statesman has an op-ed by Emil Henry, identified as assistant secretary of the Treasury from 2005 to 2007. The piece is called "Why the right can get behind an infrastructure program."
Several of his comments raise red flags. Why has this commentary come out now? Why is he advising some sort of new partnership between "conservatives" who may not have supported Obama and those who are now in a position to hand out the goodies of the stimulus funds?
Henry says:
"Party leaders are giving voice to historically underemphasized concerns such as the impact of airport, seaport and roadway congestion on productivity. . . . Barack Obama has indicated his intention to make infrastructure spending a central tenet of his economic plan and may even promote establishing a stand-alone agency in the form of the National Infrastructure Bank.
[Hope there will be sufficient safeguards against TxDOT looting this Bank.]
"By investing in the reduction of air, automotive and rail congestion . . . we will increase productivity and foster competitiveness.
[He offers no proof of this congestion that is decreasing productivity.]
"The nation also lacks high-speed rail."
[Again, no proof that the nation needs high-speed rail. Recent studies have shown that in most locations, high-speed rail is not the most efficient transportation method.]
"Investment in public transit, energy-efficient buildings, renewable energy and the systems required to implement roadway congestion pricing . . ."
[This means tolling your highways and charging you to enter a certain part of town, among other things.]
"Conservatives know that the private sector is better than the government at designing, building, operating and financing infrastructure." [Oh really. I don't think this is a given at all.] "This, combined with the magnitude of the spending required, means government will have to tap private capital and expertise. Conservatives can supply leadership in private-sector participation, encourage public-private partnerships and help ensure that central planning and prioritization are rooted in clinical cost-benefit analysis, not politics.
[Sure, there were no politics in the Gov. Perry, TxDOT, Cintra schemes, where consultants moved around revolving door style.]
When an opinion like Henry's appears, we can wonder if these thoughts occurred to the author just out of the blue. What prompted this column at this time? Is the author a disinterested expert wanting what is best for the country, or is he perhaps connected with some entity who would profit from stimulus funds being directed to the public-private partnerships advocated by TxDOT, such as its joint efforts with Cintra? Could this author be on some board or be acting as a consultant?
If this commentary is part of an organized effort to put the federal stimulus funds into the hands of those whose schemes were being thwarted by efforts by citizens at the state level and by current economic realities, we need to be aware of this and to let those in charge of the stimulus funds not to fall for this.
See the entire column at
http://www.statesman.com/opinion/content/editorial/stories/12/09/1209henry_edit.html
Several of his comments raise red flags. Why has this commentary come out now? Why is he advising some sort of new partnership between "conservatives" who may not have supported Obama and those who are now in a position to hand out the goodies of the stimulus funds?
Henry says:
"Party leaders are giving voice to historically underemphasized concerns such as the impact of airport, seaport and roadway congestion on productivity. . . . Barack Obama has indicated his intention to make infrastructure spending a central tenet of his economic plan and may even promote establishing a stand-alone agency in the form of the National Infrastructure Bank.
[Hope there will be sufficient safeguards against TxDOT looting this Bank.]
"By investing in the reduction of air, automotive and rail congestion . . . we will increase productivity and foster competitiveness.
[He offers no proof of this congestion that is decreasing productivity.]
"The nation also lacks high-speed rail."
[Again, no proof that the nation needs high-speed rail. Recent studies have shown that in most locations, high-speed rail is not the most efficient transportation method.]
"Investment in public transit, energy-efficient buildings, renewable energy and the systems required to implement roadway congestion pricing . . ."
[This means tolling your highways and charging you to enter a certain part of town, among other things.]
"Conservatives know that the private sector is better than the government at designing, building, operating and financing infrastructure." [Oh really. I don't think this is a given at all.] "This, combined with the magnitude of the spending required, means government will have to tap private capital and expertise. Conservatives can supply leadership in private-sector participation, encourage public-private partnerships and help ensure that central planning and prioritization are rooted in clinical cost-benefit analysis, not politics.
[Sure, there were no politics in the Gov. Perry, TxDOT, Cintra schemes, where consultants moved around revolving door style.]
When an opinion like Henry's appears, we can wonder if these thoughts occurred to the author just out of the blue. What prompted this column at this time? Is the author a disinterested expert wanting what is best for the country, or is he perhaps connected with some entity who would profit from stimulus funds being directed to the public-private partnerships advocated by TxDOT, such as its joint efforts with Cintra? Could this author be on some board or be acting as a consultant?
If this commentary is part of an organized effort to put the federal stimulus funds into the hands of those whose schemes were being thwarted by efforts by citizens at the state level and by current economic realities, we need to be aware of this and to let those in charge of the stimulus funds not to fall for this.
See the entire column at
http://www.statesman.com/opinion/content/editorial/stories/12/09/1209henry_edit.html
Monday, December 8, 2008
What might stimulus funds mean for transportation in our area?
TxDOT eyes funds
The new administration has proposed a $700 billion stimulus package, intended to create jobs by, among other things, rebuilding infrastructure. The headline of the Austin Business Journal article on November 24 causes the blood to run cold in those who have been fighting the ill-conceived schemes of TxDOT: "TxDOT has eyes on proposed stimulus funds.”
TxDOT has “notified the state’s Metropolitan Planning Organizations to begin identifying ‘ready to go’ projects that could qualify for a new $700 billion federal stimulus proposed this week by President-elect Barack Obama.”
“ Joe Cantalupo, executive director of the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization, says . . . the list is in progress and declined to name specific projects . . .”
TxDOT compiles list of projects
On December 5, the Statesman’s Ben Wear said, “Texas . . . says it has $6 billion worth of projects that could break ground by August.” State transportation departments came up with their projects at the behest of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. TxDOT claims that their “list of 852 projects was heavy with maintenance work and bridge repairs, with relatively few big new roads or road expansion projects.”
Bruce Melton, P.E., looks at the projects’ costs
Bruce Melton, P.E., a member of the fix290 group, has a commentary “Stimulus Package—Numbers you won’t believe!” He quotes from Ben Wear’s article, “The state agencies compiled the list at the request of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation officials. That trade group’s lobbyists wanted to be able to assure Congress that if it made the money available in the form of an economic stimulus package, it would get spent quickly enough to actually put people to work right away and stimulate the economy.”
Bruce says, “The key words above are ‘trade group’s lobbyists.” He goes on to explain “What the real numbers say.” “From the TxDOT list. the Austin Region total is $985 million, $504 million is for 290E, and there are another $184 million in other new construction projects in the Austin District bringing the total to $680 million for 11 new construction projects that predominantly or entirely include new lanes, overpasses or something blatant that shows these projects are obviously ‘new’ construction. [Bruce’s point is that this proposed new construction goes against the stimulus goal of maintenance and repairs.] This is 70% of the $985 million total for the Austin Region.
"Note, Ben’s quote above—when analyzed for the number of projects is correct. There are 95 total projects in the Austin Region—89% are for repair, rehab or maintenance.
“(Note: I have only looked at the projects that each individually total more than $10 million.)
“Total for all of Texas $6.207 billion. New construction is ALMOST HALF! Just 7% of all of the proposed stimulus projects in Texas account for 46% of the money. There are some funky statistics happening here folks.
“Oh yeah, Austin tops the list. (Dallas/Fort Worth beats Austin, but only if you add them together.)
“(In millions)
$985 Austin
$924 Fort Worth
$676 Houston
$595 Dallas
way down the list
$133 San Antonio”
[end of Bruce’s comments]
So far, the Obama administration has seemed to prefer that the proposed stimulus spending go for maintenance and repairs on existing roads and bridges, and not for new capacity unless it involves public transit.
It does seem that if the expansion of 290 East is really needed and/or if they are determined to build it whether it is needed or not, it would be better to use stimulus funds rather than proceed with the tolling plan. Right now, it hard to determine if the expansion is needed, because the final traffic study figures have not been released to the public, and the last few years of figures seem to show traffic decreasing on 290 East.
The new administration has proposed a $700 billion stimulus package, intended to create jobs by, among other things, rebuilding infrastructure. The headline of the Austin Business Journal article on November 24 causes the blood to run cold in those who have been fighting the ill-conceived schemes of TxDOT: "TxDOT has eyes on proposed stimulus funds.”
TxDOT has “notified the state’s Metropolitan Planning Organizations to begin identifying ‘ready to go’ projects that could qualify for a new $700 billion federal stimulus proposed this week by President-elect Barack Obama.”
“ Joe Cantalupo, executive director of the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization, says . . . the list is in progress and declined to name specific projects . . .”
TxDOT compiles list of projects
On December 5, the Statesman’s Ben Wear said, “Texas . . . says it has $6 billion worth of projects that could break ground by August.” State transportation departments came up with their projects at the behest of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. TxDOT claims that their “list of 852 projects was heavy with maintenance work and bridge repairs, with relatively few big new roads or road expansion projects.”
Bruce Melton, P.E., looks at the projects’ costs
Bruce Melton, P.E., a member of the fix290 group, has a commentary “Stimulus Package—Numbers you won’t believe!” He quotes from Ben Wear’s article, “The state agencies compiled the list at the request of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation officials. That trade group’s lobbyists wanted to be able to assure Congress that if it made the money available in the form of an economic stimulus package, it would get spent quickly enough to actually put people to work right away and stimulate the economy.”
Bruce says, “The key words above are ‘trade group’s lobbyists.” He goes on to explain “What the real numbers say.” “From the TxDOT list. the Austin Region total is $985 million, $504 million is for 290E, and there are another $184 million in other new construction projects in the Austin District bringing the total to $680 million for 11 new construction projects that predominantly or entirely include new lanes, overpasses or something blatant that shows these projects are obviously ‘new’ construction. [Bruce’s point is that this proposed new construction goes against the stimulus goal of maintenance and repairs.] This is 70% of the $985 million total for the Austin Region.
"Note, Ben’s quote above—when analyzed for the number of projects is correct. There are 95 total projects in the Austin Region—89% are for repair, rehab or maintenance.
“(Note: I have only looked at the projects that each individually total more than $10 million.)
“Total for all of Texas $6.207 billion. New construction is ALMOST HALF! Just 7% of all of the proposed stimulus projects in Texas account for 46% of the money. There are some funky statistics happening here folks.
“Oh yeah, Austin tops the list. (Dallas/Fort Worth beats Austin, but only if you add them together.)
“(In millions)
$985 Austin
$924 Fort Worth
$676 Houston
$595 Dallas
way down the list
$133 San Antonio”
[end of Bruce’s comments]
So far, the Obama administration has seemed to prefer that the proposed stimulus spending go for maintenance and repairs on existing roads and bridges, and not for new capacity unless it involves public transit.
It does seem that if the expansion of 290 East is really needed and/or if they are determined to build it whether it is needed or not, it would be better to use stimulus funds rather than proceed with the tolling plan. Right now, it hard to determine if the expansion is needed, because the final traffic study figures have not been released to the public, and the last few years of figures seem to show traffic decreasing on 290 East.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
