Commentary by The Overhead Wire • September 2007
The following commentary has been adapted from entries originally posted to The Overhead Wire Weblog on 10 September 2007 and the Daily Kos on 11 September 2007.
The US Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has issued an extremely ominous and potentially retrogressive Notice of Proposed Rule-Making (NPRM) for the New and Small Starts programs. These programs provide the basic new-starts funding for major fixed-guideway capital projects such as light rail transit (LRT), rail rapid transit (RRT, or "heavy rail"), and so-called bus rapid transit (BRT).
Rails to roads?
The proposed new rules are alarming on a number of levels. Most notably, they downgrade the importance of land use and economic development despite congressional direction to the contrary, and they propose to redefine the definition of "fixed-guideway" to include transit funding for highway lanes that use tolling schemes – thus diverting rail transit money into roadway (tollway) development.
Why is this important? To some extent, the FTA's proposed new rules would entrench policy positions advocated by notorious motor vehicle zealots and transit critics – folks such as the libertarian Reason Foundation and the Randal O'Toole/Wendell Cox cabal. The proposed rules ignore current transportation law regarding required project justification criteria and add new Federal intervention into the local decision-making process. If finalized, the new rule-making policy will hamper American cities' ability to build new transit lines for the next 5 years!
However, the fiscal year 2008 appropriations bill moving through congress is an opportunity to formally weigh in and stop or alter the proposed FTA rule. In a recent development, Senators Christopher Dodd and Richard Shelby have proposed an amendment to kill the FTA's new rules. Transit advocates may wish to communicate their views on this issue to their own Senators on the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development Subcommittee, which can be accessed at the Senate Transportation appropriations webpage.
UPDATE: Light Rail Now has been informed that the Dodd-Shelby amendment was passed and has been added to the appropriations bill. However, President George W. Bush is threatening to veto this legislation. It's currently unknown whether there are sufficient votes in the US Senate to override such a veto.
More details on the new rule-making
See full text of the FTA's proposed rule.
This would diminish the ability of cities to get funding from an already crowded grant program. HOT lanes qualify for funding from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) ... and we all know there's a lot of funding there. Over 300 New Starts projects – light rail transit (LRT), rail rapid transit, regional passenger rail ("commuter rail"), bus rapid transit – were authorized by the SAFETEA-LU federal transportation bill, and the argument by the FTA as to why they have such an intensive scrutiny of proposals is based mainly on the high demand for limited funding. Adding High Occupancy Toll freeway lanes to the list of eligible projects further strains the FTA's ability to fund new transit projects.
2. FTA would make the dreadful (and misnamed) cost-effectiveness index (CEI) the primary factor in deciding the fate of funding for New Starts projects
This "index" is the same measure that is killing top-quality rail projects, such as the Tyson's Corner Metro extension (Washington, DC area) and has killed, or set back, light rail plans in Columbus, Ohio, Raleigh. NC, and elsewhere. Almost every city that is looking to build new transit projects is worried about qualifying under this seriously flawed measure, and now it's being made even stronger. This measure is the reason why Minneapolis's Central Corridor light rail project might not be able to tunnel under the University of Minnesota, and why locally backed expansion of light rail has been turned into less effective BRT projects in some Houston corridors.
3. FTA's rulemaking pushes cheap, not completely dedicated-guideway, bus projects
The irony of the cost-effectiveness index is that, in reality, it fails to capture the full benefits and cost-effectiveness of a project. The index evaluates the cost-effectiveness of a light rail project versus corridor improvements such as bus rapid transit or improved local bus service. What this does is force cities to choose bus rapid transit projects over citizen-backed light rail projects that may have greater community benefits but also a higher initial price tag. Also, the measurements for the Very Small Starts program are set using the Southtown rapid bus project in Kansas City (which runs on city streets), and not rail or fixed-guideway BRT projects such as Los Angeles's Orange Line busway.
4. FTA reduces or ignores the importance of land use and economic development measures
Congress elevated land use and added economic development as project justification criteria in SAFETEA-LU (the current federal transit authorization). The US Department of Transportation (DOT), however, ignores this and has combined them into one measure with a combined weight of 20% in the overall rating process. The FTA states that it is too costly to implement the economic development measure, but the cost and burden to grantees such as cities and transit agencies is not considered when local jurisdictions are required to adopt the FTA's travel demand models, which have many problems and questionable aspects. The fact that they use those models to determine the "cost-effectiveness" rating – which decides who gets funding – is a problem in itself, as this rating index can't address all the benefits of fixed-guideway transit.
Furthermore, FTA argues that it's too difficult to separate land use from economic development, and that the increase in property values associated with proximity to transit is merely a result of improved time savings alone. We're sure many zoning offices and developers would be surprised to have these effects categorized so simplistically.
5. FTA's new policy could lower ratings for cities who are trying to address future rather than current congestion issues
The FTA would like to measure the New Starts program by the benefits to highway users, but ignores the effect of induced demand, which means that, when you build a new transit project, the space from cars that are taken off the road by transit is filled by new cars. The aim of transit opponents – to push money from the transit program into congestion pricing schemes and not-so-rapid bus projects – would result in less useful transit projects in corridors that might have real future need.
What can be done?
Transit advocates and other proponents of improved public transportation might consider contacting their congressmen or senators, to request them to stop the FTA's proposed rule and give the Department of Transportation a clear directive that the FTA must:
1. Comparably weight all 6 project justification criteria (mobility improvements, environmental benefits, operating efficiencies, cost-effectiveness, land use factors, and other factors – e.g., economic development, environmental justice considerations, livable communities initiatives, etc.), while recognizing the particular importance of transit-supportive land use and economic development in fostering successful and sustainable projects rather than considering just the direct costs of the project.
2. Maintain the current definition of "fixed-guideway transit" – i.e., focused on transit services operating on rails, special guideways, or busways.
3. Desist from raiding the federal transit program for road pricing schemes.
Light Rail Now! website
Here are details on what the FTA's new rules would do:
1. FTA would allow High Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes to qualify for New Starts funding
Thursday, October 25, 2007
House plan would make I-80 a toll road - Republicans failed to postpone a vote. Senate prospects are uncertain.
By Paul Nussbaum - Philadelphi Inquirer Staff Writer - Jun. 22, 2007
HARRISBURG - Democratic legislators, narrowly in control of the state House, pushed yesterday for new funding for mass transit and highways, setting the stage for a battle with the Republican-controlled Senate.
Rather than lease the Pennsylvania Turnpike to a private company to raise the money, as requested by Gov. Rendell, the House plan would expand the turnpike commission's domain by making Interstate 80 a toll road.
And it would call for more local funding for transit, with authority for local governments to raise taxes to pay for it.
An initial vote on the measure was delayed until Monday, after contentious debate on the House floor that lasted until nearly 11 p.m. If it receives initial approval on Monday, the bill would still face a final vote before it could be sent to the Senate.
SEPTA officials, facing the prospect of steep fare hikes and service cuts without $100 million in additional state money, were cautiously optimistic that lawmakers were moving toward a solution. But they weren't popping any champagne corks yet.
"We're very pleased that we're seeing a lot of activity, but we're not there yet," SEPTA general manager Faye Moore said yesterday.
The House bill would provide about $102 million more in operating funds for SEPTA for the budget year that begins July 1.
The bill would fund transportation by borrowing against future toll increases on the Pennsylvania Turnpike and newly created tolls on I-80 across northern Pennsylvania. The increases and new tolls would be deferred until 2010.
Any tolls on I-80 would require approval by the Federal Highway Administration.
Tolls on the turnpike would rise by 25 percent in 2010 and about 2.5 percent a year after that. Tolls on I-80 would be set at the same per-mile rate (currently about 8 cents a mile) as those on the turnpike.
The House bill would raise an estimated $705 million in the next fiscal year, with $305 million earmarked for transit and $400 million for highways and bridges. The total funding is expected to rise to $900 million by 2010.
The amounts fall well short of $1.7 billion a year that a state panel calculated was necessary to repair highways and bridges and shore up mass-transit systems. Rendell proposed to raise $965 million a year for highways by leasing the turnpike and $760 million a year for transit by imposing a tax on oil company profits.
The House proposal, a 57-page amendment by majority whip Rep. Keith McCall (D., Carbon) to House Bill 1590, would increase funding from local governments (to 20 percent from the current 13 percent of state funding) and would authorize them to raise money by increasing the realty transfer tax, the earned income tax, the sales tax, or a parking surcharge.
The measure would also increase Philadelphia's clout on the SEPTA board of directors. The board would be increased from 15 members to 21, and counties would be allotted members on the board according to their share of local funding, up to eight members for counties that provide at least 50 percent of the local funding. Currently, Philadelphia provides 80 percent of the local operating funding to SEPTA.
Rep. Tom Killion (R., Delaware), a former SEPTA board member, criticized that change.
"We're about to shift all the power on that board to the city of Philadelphia," Killion said. He said the change would remove the incentive for the five counties to work together to run SEPTA.
And Rep. Mario Civera (R., Delaware), the ranking Republican on the appropriations committee, asserted that the change was "a Philadelphia grab. . . . Don't push this down our throats."
Rep. Dwight Evans (D., Phila.), chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, was conciliatory, telling Civera that "this is only the first step in a long negotiation. . . . We're going to work together."
With eight days left in the budget year, Evans reiterated his vow to block passage of a new budget unless the Senate approved funding for mass transit this month.
"They can't wait till fall," Evans said in an interview yesterday.
Senate Republican leaders indicated little desire to immediately tackle the funding issue. "I don't know that it can get approved in the next week, and I don't know that it's a crisis if it doesn't," said Erik Arneson, spokesman for Senate majority leader Dominic Pileggi (R., Delaware). "Sen. Pileggi's goal is to address this, but not in a way that makes members feel rushed."
Read more in the Philadelphia Inquirer
HARRISBURG - Democratic legislators, narrowly in control of the state House, pushed yesterday for new funding for mass transit and highways, setting the stage for a battle with the Republican-controlled Senate.
Rather than lease the Pennsylvania Turnpike to a private company to raise the money, as requested by Gov. Rendell, the House plan would expand the turnpike commission's domain by making Interstate 80 a toll road.
And it would call for more local funding for transit, with authority for local governments to raise taxes to pay for it.
An initial vote on the measure was delayed until Monday, after contentious debate on the House floor that lasted until nearly 11 p.m. If it receives initial approval on Monday, the bill would still face a final vote before it could be sent to the Senate.
SEPTA officials, facing the prospect of steep fare hikes and service cuts without $100 million in additional state money, were cautiously optimistic that lawmakers were moving toward a solution. But they weren't popping any champagne corks yet.
"We're very pleased that we're seeing a lot of activity, but we're not there yet," SEPTA general manager Faye Moore said yesterday.
The House bill would provide about $102 million more in operating funds for SEPTA for the budget year that begins July 1.
The bill would fund transportation by borrowing against future toll increases on the Pennsylvania Turnpike and newly created tolls on I-80 across northern Pennsylvania. The increases and new tolls would be deferred until 2010.
Any tolls on I-80 would require approval by the Federal Highway Administration.
Tolls on the turnpike would rise by 25 percent in 2010 and about 2.5 percent a year after that. Tolls on I-80 would be set at the same per-mile rate (currently about 8 cents a mile) as those on the turnpike.
The House bill would raise an estimated $705 million in the next fiscal year, with $305 million earmarked for transit and $400 million for highways and bridges. The total funding is expected to rise to $900 million by 2010.
The amounts fall well short of $1.7 billion a year that a state panel calculated was necessary to repair highways and bridges and shore up mass-transit systems. Rendell proposed to raise $965 million a year for highways by leasing the turnpike and $760 million a year for transit by imposing a tax on oil company profits.
The House proposal, a 57-page amendment by majority whip Rep. Keith McCall (D., Carbon) to House Bill 1590, would increase funding from local governments (to 20 percent from the current 13 percent of state funding) and would authorize them to raise money by increasing the realty transfer tax, the earned income tax, the sales tax, or a parking surcharge.
The measure would also increase Philadelphia's clout on the SEPTA board of directors. The board would be increased from 15 members to 21, and counties would be allotted members on the board according to their share of local funding, up to eight members for counties that provide at least 50 percent of the local funding. Currently, Philadelphia provides 80 percent of the local operating funding to SEPTA.
Rep. Tom Killion (R., Delaware), a former SEPTA board member, criticized that change.
"We're about to shift all the power on that board to the city of Philadelphia," Killion said. He said the change would remove the incentive for the five counties to work together to run SEPTA.
And Rep. Mario Civera (R., Delaware), the ranking Republican on the appropriations committee, asserted that the change was "a Philadelphia grab. . . . Don't push this down our throats."
Rep. Dwight Evans (D., Phila.), chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, was conciliatory, telling Civera that "this is only the first step in a long negotiation. . . . We're going to work together."
With eight days left in the budget year, Evans reiterated his vow to block passage of a new budget unless the Senate approved funding for mass transit this month.
"They can't wait till fall," Evans said in an interview yesterday.
Senate Republican leaders indicated little desire to immediately tackle the funding issue. "I don't know that it can get approved in the next week, and I don't know that it's a crisis if it doesn't," said Erik Arneson, spokesman for Senate majority leader Dominic Pileggi (R., Delaware). "Sen. Pileggi's goal is to address this, but not in a way that makes members feel rushed."
Read more in the Philadelphia Inquirer
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
T.U.R.F. Press Cconference video on Federal Lawsuit against San Antonio Metropolitan Planning Organization
TURF to sue transportation board for equal protection
MPO Board composition violates First and 14th Amendments to U.S. Constitution
By Terri Hall - T.U.R.F. - Oct. 23, 2007
San Antonio, TX, Monday, October 22, 2007 – In what could change the way toll roads are decided and approved in Bexar County, TURF filed a NEW lawsuit in FEDERAL COURT to put the power over transportation decisions back in the hands of the PEOPLE. TURF recently scored a victory in STATE COURT in a different lawsuit (read it here) against members of the Texas Transportation Department and Transportation Commission.
A lawsuit has been brought against the San Antonio Metropolitan Planning Organization (SAMPO) Transportation Policy Board that allocates tax dollars to transportation projects and approves toll rates and toll projects and San Antonio Councilwoman and MPO Chair Sheila McNeil. The lawsuit alleges that the composition of the SAMPO Board is unconstitutional and Chairwoman McNeil has been a party to denying the First Amendment right of free speech to the constituents of elected MPO Board members like State Representative David Leibowitz by blocking an agenda item and any debate on an issue brought up at his request. This novel lawsuit cuts to the heart of how toll roads are approved.
It’s based upon the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, 28 U.S.C. §1331, and 28 U.S.C. §§1343(3) and (4). The section of the post-Civil War civil rights enactments codified as 42 U.S.C. §1983 provides the Plaintiff’s enabling cause of action. A faction of governmental officials with the help of unelected board members have shut citizens and voters who oppose toll roads out of equal participation in the political process. The case will also argue that actions like Chairwoman McNeil’s removal of an agenda item asking for the funds TxDOT is spending on the Keep Texas Moving ad campaign be returned to building roads.
By way of recent example, in a SAMPO Transportation Policy Board meeting of September 24, 2007, Defendant McNeil, using the badge of authority of Chairmanship of the Board, arbitrarily removed from the meeting agenda a motion by State Representative and MPO Board member David Leibowitz calling for SAMPO to object to certain expenditures of public money by TXDOT promoting toll roads, which expenditures Representative Leibowitz believed to be inappropriate.
Defendant McNeil, acting under color of law, removed Representative Leibowitz’s motion from the meeting agenda even though Representative Leibowitz had properly and legitimately placed it on the meeting agenda and SAMPO had included it in the public posting of the agenda pursuant to the Texas Open Meetings Act. Defendant McNeil, acting under color of law, refused to permit Representative Leibowitz to present his motion because of her disfavor of his attempt to provide a voice for his constituents who oppose turning free public highways into toll roads.
TURF will be asking for both a temporary and permanent injunction to suspend ALL activities of the MPO until the case is decided and the Board’s composition is changed to reflect proper Constitutional representation allowing equal protection under the law per the 14th Amendment.
The unconstitutional MPO has blocked agenda items, voted against an independent review of toll plans that would bring accountability to the gross misuse of taxpayer money in these toll plans, voted against restoring the gas tax funded overpasses on 281 (281 in particular DOES NOT NEED TO BE TOLLED, what’s needed are overpasses and they’ve been paid for since 2003, the money is STILL there, they could do it tomorrow, but this un-Constitutional Board persists in preventing the simple solution that’s already paid for!
The MPO Board has also delayed votes, blocked the succession of the next Chair, and changed the bylaws to allow yet more illegal representation on the Board.
“The people of Texas are FED-UP with out-of-control abusive government. We’ve done everything in our power to exert the political pressure to change this unconstitutional Board, but when the deck is stacked and a powerful unelected voting block is allowed to persist unchecked, we have no choice but go to court to address our grievances. This is taxation without representation and we cannot and will not allow it to continue,” says Terri Hall, Founder and Director of TURF.
For a history of the efforts of the pro-toll faction blocking citizens from equal representation:
Click here and scroll to bottom for links to each action.
Chairwoman McNeil strips agenda item requested by State Representative David Leibowitz on expenditures for toll roads (click here.)
Monday, October 22, 2007
TURF sues transportation board for equal protection
By Terri Hall - T.U.R.F. - Oct. 22, 2007
MPO Board composition violates First and 14th Amendments to U.S. Constitution
San Antonio, TX, Monday, October 22, 2007 – In what could change the way toll roads are decided and approved in Bexar County, TURF filed a NEW lawsuit in FEDERAL COURT to put the power over transportation decisions back in the hands of the PEOPLE. TURF recently scored a victory in STATE COURT in a different lawsuit against members of the Texas Transportation Department and Transportation Commission.
A lawsuit has been brought against the San Antonio Metropolitan Planning Organization (SAMPO) Transportation Policy Board that allocates tax dollars to transportation projects and approves toll rates and toll projects and San Antonio Councilwoman and MPO Chair Sheila McNeil. The lawsuit alleges that the composition of the SAMPO Board is unconstitutional and Chairwoman McNeil has been a party to denying the First Amendment right of free speech to the constituents of elected MPO Board members like State Representative David Leibowitz by blocking an agenda item and any debate on an issue brought up at his request. This novel lawsuit cuts to the heart of how toll roads are approved.
It’s based upon the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, 28 U.S.C. §1331, and 28 U.S.C. §§1343(3) and (4). The section of the post-Civil War civil rights enactments codified as 42 U.S.C. §1983 provides the Plaintiff’s enabling cause of action. A faction of governmental officials with the help of unelected board members have shut citizens and voters who oppose toll roads out of equal participation in the political process. The case will also argue that actions like Chairwoman McNeil’s removal of an agenda item asking for the funds TxDOT is spending on the Keep Texas Moving ad campaign be returned to building roads.
By way of recent example, in a SAMPO Transportation Policy Board meeting of September 24, 2007, Defendant McNeil, using the badge of authority of Chairmanship of the Board, arbitrarily removed from the meeting agenda a motion by State Representative and MPO Board member David Leibowitz calling for SAMPO to object to certain expenditures of public money by TXDOT promoting toll roads, which expenditures Representative Leibowitz believed to be inappropriate.
Defendant McNeil, acting under color of law, removed Representative Leibowitz’s motion from the meeting agenda even though Representative Leibowitz had properly and legitimately placed it on the meeting agenda and SAMPO had included it in the public posting of the agenda pursuant to the Texas Open Meetings Act. Defendant McNeil, acting under color of law, refused to permit Representative Leibowitz to present his motion because of her disfavor of his attempt to provide a voice for his constituents who oppose turning free public highways into toll roads.
TURF will be asking for both a temporary and permanent injunction to suspend ALL activities of the MPO until the case is decided and the Board’s composition is changed to reflect proper Constitutional representation allowing equal protection under the law per the 14th Amendment.
The unconstitutional MPO has blocked agenda items, voted against an independent review of toll plans that would bring accountability to the gross misuse of taxpayer money in these toll plans, voted against restoring the gas tax funded overpasses on 281 (281 in particular DOES NOT NEED TO BE TOLLED, what’s needed are overpasses and they’ve been paid for since 2003, the money is STILL there, they could do it tomorrow, but this un-Constitutional Board persists in preventing the simple solution that’s already paid for!
The MPO Board has also delayed votes, blocked the succession of the next Chair, and changed the bylaws to allow yet more illegal representation on the Board.
“The people of Texas are FED-UP with out-of-control abusive government. We’ve done everything in our power to exert the political pressure to change this unconstitutional Board, but when the deck is stacked and a powerful unelected voting block is allowed to persist unchecked, we have no choice but go to court to address our grievances. This is taxation without representation and we cannot and will not allow it to continue,” says Terri Hall, Founder and Director of TURF.
See history of the efforts of the pro-toll faction blocking citizens from equal representation. (scroll to bottom for links to each action)
Chairwoman McNeil stripped agenda item requested by State Representative David Leibowitz on expenditures for toll roads.
San Antonio attorney David Van Os, is representing TURF.
MPO Board composition violates First and 14th Amendments to U.S. Constitution
San Antonio, TX, Monday, October 22, 2007 – In what could change the way toll roads are decided and approved in Bexar County, TURF filed a NEW lawsuit in FEDERAL COURT to put the power over transportation decisions back in the hands of the PEOPLE. TURF recently scored a victory in STATE COURT in a different lawsuit against members of the Texas Transportation Department and Transportation Commission.
A lawsuit has been brought against the San Antonio Metropolitan Planning Organization (SAMPO) Transportation Policy Board that allocates tax dollars to transportation projects and approves toll rates and toll projects and San Antonio Councilwoman and MPO Chair Sheila McNeil. The lawsuit alleges that the composition of the SAMPO Board is unconstitutional and Chairwoman McNeil has been a party to denying the First Amendment right of free speech to the constituents of elected MPO Board members like State Representative David Leibowitz by blocking an agenda item and any debate on an issue brought up at his request. This novel lawsuit cuts to the heart of how toll roads are approved.
It’s based upon the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, 28 U.S.C. §1331, and 28 U.S.C. §§1343(3) and (4). The section of the post-Civil War civil rights enactments codified as 42 U.S.C. §1983 provides the Plaintiff’s enabling cause of action. A faction of governmental officials with the help of unelected board members have shut citizens and voters who oppose toll roads out of equal participation in the political process. The case will also argue that actions like Chairwoman McNeil’s removal of an agenda item asking for the funds TxDOT is spending on the Keep Texas Moving ad campaign be returned to building roads.
By way of recent example, in a SAMPO Transportation Policy Board meeting of September 24, 2007, Defendant McNeil, using the badge of authority of Chairmanship of the Board, arbitrarily removed from the meeting agenda a motion by State Representative and MPO Board member David Leibowitz calling for SAMPO to object to certain expenditures of public money by TXDOT promoting toll roads, which expenditures Representative Leibowitz believed to be inappropriate.
Defendant McNeil, acting under color of law, removed Representative Leibowitz’s motion from the meeting agenda even though Representative Leibowitz had properly and legitimately placed it on the meeting agenda and SAMPO had included it in the public posting of the agenda pursuant to the Texas Open Meetings Act. Defendant McNeil, acting under color of law, refused to permit Representative Leibowitz to present his motion because of her disfavor of his attempt to provide a voice for his constituents who oppose turning free public highways into toll roads.
TURF will be asking for both a temporary and permanent injunction to suspend ALL activities of the MPO until the case is decided and the Board’s composition is changed to reflect proper Constitutional representation allowing equal protection under the law per the 14th Amendment.
The unconstitutional MPO has blocked agenda items, voted against an independent review of toll plans that would bring accountability to the gross misuse of taxpayer money in these toll plans, voted against restoring the gas tax funded overpasses on 281 (281 in particular DOES NOT NEED TO BE TOLLED, what’s needed are overpasses and they’ve been paid for since 2003, the money is STILL there, they could do it tomorrow, but this un-Constitutional Board persists in preventing the simple solution that’s already paid for!
The MPO Board has also delayed votes, blocked the succession of the next Chair, and changed the bylaws to allow yet more illegal representation on the Board.
“The people of Texas are FED-UP with out-of-control abusive government. We’ve done everything in our power to exert the political pressure to change this unconstitutional Board, but when the deck is stacked and a powerful unelected voting block is allowed to persist unchecked, we have no choice but go to court to address our grievances. This is taxation without representation and we cannot and will not allow it to continue,” says Terri Hall, Founder and Director of TURF.
See history of the efforts of the pro-toll faction blocking citizens from equal representation. (scroll to bottom for links to each action)
Chairwoman McNeil stripped agenda item requested by State Representative David Leibowitz on expenditures for toll roads.
San Antonio attorney David Van Os, is representing TURF.
City of Mansfield changes Debt Collectors due to questionable political campaign contribution
City Council plans to consider hiring new debt collector
By ROBERT CADWALLADER - Special to the Star-Telegram - Oct. 22, 2007
MANSFIELD -- The City Council tonight will consider hiring a Round Rock-based law firm to replace the city's fired debt collector.
The staff has recommended McCreary, Veselka, Bragg & Allen, which collects delinquent property taxes or court fees and fines for about 450 taxing jurisdictions statewide. The firm has no collection clients in Tarrant or Dallas counties.
The council terminated the city's contract with Linebarger, Goggan, Blair & Sampson of Fort Worth on Sept. 28, taking issue with a $2,000 campaign contribution the firm made to Mayor Barton Scott after his election in May. The move apparently did not violate local or state campaign finance laws, but the council called it inappropriate and also voiced concerns about investigations of Linebarger contributions in other cities.
Scott, who blamed council politics for Linebarger's firing, said he will question the recommendation for McCreary because the staff did not conduct a full selection process, including advertising for proposals.
"When we start playing political games with vendors, we are not acting in the best interests of the citizens," Scott said.
Staff officials said they didn't advertise for proposals because the process would have taken at least 90 days. The city has no one collecting back taxes.
As a corporation, McCreary is prohibited by law from making political contributions, a McCreary official said. Although individual employees are allowed to donate to local candidates, no employees will donate to Mansfield public officials, President Harvey Allen said.
That could become the law in Mansfield anyway. A council subcommittee is considering revising the city's ethics ordinance.
"I will tell you, we as a firm get virtually no solicitations for campaign contributions from anybody," Allen said. "And I think that's because we have the reputation of not doing it."
Linebarger, as a limited liability partnership, is allowed to make political contributions.
Read more in the Fort Worth Star Telegram
By ROBERT CADWALLADER - Special to the Star-Telegram - Oct. 22, 2007
MANSFIELD -- The City Council tonight will consider hiring a Round Rock-based law firm to replace the city's fired debt collector.
The staff has recommended McCreary, Veselka, Bragg & Allen, which collects delinquent property taxes or court fees and fines for about 450 taxing jurisdictions statewide. The firm has no collection clients in Tarrant or Dallas counties.
The council terminated the city's contract with Linebarger, Goggan, Blair & Sampson of Fort Worth on Sept. 28, taking issue with a $2,000 campaign contribution the firm made to Mayor Barton Scott after his election in May. The move apparently did not violate local or state campaign finance laws, but the council called it inappropriate and also voiced concerns about investigations of Linebarger contributions in other cities.
Scott, who blamed council politics for Linebarger's firing, said he will question the recommendation for McCreary because the staff did not conduct a full selection process, including advertising for proposals.
"When we start playing political games with vendors, we are not acting in the best interests of the citizens," Scott said.
Staff officials said they didn't advertise for proposals because the process would have taken at least 90 days. The city has no one collecting back taxes.
As a corporation, McCreary is prohibited by law from making political contributions, a McCreary official said. Although individual employees are allowed to donate to local candidates, no employees will donate to Mansfield public officials, President Harvey Allen said.
That could become the law in Mansfield anyway. A council subcommittee is considering revising the city's ethics ordinance.
"I will tell you, we as a firm get virtually no solicitations for campaign contributions from anybody," Allen said. "And I think that's because we have the reputation of not doing it."
Linebarger, as a limited liability partnership, is allowed to make political contributions.
Read more in the Fort Worth Star Telegram
Sunday, October 21, 2007
Trinity park planners challenged to provide easy access over levees - Bridges, trails suggested as ways to enter planned oasis
By BRUCE TOMASO - The Dallas Morning News - Sunday, October 21, 2007
Designers of the Trinity River project have an ambitious vision.
They say they want to see the river transformed "from the city's back alley to its front yard."
The central element of that vision, for many people, is the proposed downtown Trinity River park. With its lakes, river meanders, hiking trails, canoeing course, greenbelts and promenades, the downtown park, at roughly 100 acres, is often extolled as having the potential to become Dallas' Central Park, or Dallas' River Walk, or Dallas' Town Lake – an urban oasis that will draw visitors from near and far.
Also Online
Interactive map: Trinity toll road issues
Map: Trinity toll road issues (.pdf)
Archive: Learn more about the Trinity toll road fight
But there's at least one big obstacle to that vision – or two, actually – having nothing to do with the Nov. 6 referendum on whether to build a toll road in the park.
Unlike Central Park, or the San Antonio River Walk, or Austin's Town Lake, the Trinity is cut off from the rest of the city by its levees – "two 30-foot mounds of dirt separated by a half-mile of weeds," in the memorable phrase of Paul Lehner, director of planning and development for the city's Trinity River Corridor Project office.
"We can't do exactly what they've done in San Antonio," said Mr. Lehner. "We won't have people who can just step out their doors and be right at the water, because of the levees. For that reason, providing connectivity to the park through a number of points has been very high on our list."
The levees, built in the 1920s and '30s to protect downtown against flooding, aren't going anywhere. In fact, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers plans to raise the levees by about two feet over the next few years.
The corps has said emphatically that whatever else is done to the river corridor – park, lakes, toll road, no toll road – flood protection remains its primary function.
So to get to the park, folks would have to find ways over those "mounds of dirt."
Dallas being Dallas, many of them would drive. Their access to the park depends very much on what happens Nov. 6, when voters will weigh in on Proposition 1, a ballot measure to scrap the high-speed toll road now planned inside the levees.
Whether that toll road is built – and, if it isn't, what gets built instead – will affect many aspects of the Trinity project, from its funding sources to its build-out schedule to the aesthetics of the park to transportation through and to the central city. One of few things that both sides agree on in the toll road debate is that a lot of uncertainty looms – and a lot of recalibration will have to take place – if Proposition 1 passes and the toll road is scrapped.
In ways big or small, the vote could alter almost everything and anything about the park. So all of what follows is open to change. There are lots of things we simply don't know about how the Trinity project might look.
But for now, let us forget about toll roads, figuratively park our cars, lace up our walking shoes and take a stroll through some of the plans for ways that Dallas residents would be able to get to, and enjoy, their park on foot.
Reunion Overlook
This would be one of the prime entry points to the downtown park – and, Mr. Lehner hopes, a gathering point in and of itself.
Reunion Boulevard is the short roadway off Houston Street that now passes the Hyatt Regency Dallas, Reunion Tower and Reunion Arena before dead-ending at Industrial Boulevard.
Under its plans, the city would extend the boulevard another few hundred feet to the west, to the river levee. There, a building of some sort could be built – there is no final design now – at the level of the levee top. The building could house an information center, perhaps a history museum of the Trinity River, perhaps concession stands. From it, there would be "vertical access" via elevators or stairways, down into the river bottoms. At that point, visitors would be in the park, at the promenade along the water.
Mr. Lehner told a City Council committee last week that the Reunion Overlook could evolve into the main "linkage between downtown and the Trinity Corridor."
The trails
The park is to include a network of trails – some near the water and some, perhaps, along the tops of the levees.
Near Sylvan Avenue, these trails would connect with the Trinity Strand Trail, a new trail network being built just outside the levees, behind the Stemmons Freeway along the original, meandering channel of the Trinity River.
The Trinity Strand Trail, in turn, would eventually hook up with the Katy Trail at a point just north of American Airlines Center.
That means hikers, joggers, bicyclists and roller-skaters could come down the Katy Trail from as far away as Southern Methodist University – and eventually farther, as the Katy Trail expands – and get into the Trinity park.
And from the Knox-Henderson neighborhood south, those visitors would never have to cross a vehicular road, said Mike Kutner, chairman of Friends of the Trinity Strand Trail, a group raising private money to complete the trail.
He also noted that there are 13 hotels, including the huge Hilton Anatole, along Stemmons Freeway within a short walk of the Trinity Strand.
"For visitors to our city to be able to walk out of their hotel and get on these trails and enter the park – that would be fantastic," he said.
DART
The Dallas Area Rapid Transit station at Eighth and Corinth streets in Oak Cliff is the southernmost station that jointly serves DART's red and blue rail lines.
The station is close to the Trinity, near where the downtown levees stop.
It's also adjacent to an abandoned railroad trestle. That old railroad bridge, city officials said, could be converted to a pedestrian bridge. Visitors from as far away as Garland or Plano could ride DART to Eighth and Corinth and use the pedestrian bridge as a way into the river bottoms.
At that point, they'd be near the northern boundary of the Great Trinity Forest, an unspoiled hardwood stand covering several thousand acres that the city is assembling. A canoe launch into the river channel is also planned at Moore Gateway Park, near the trestle.
Continental Avenue
Work has just begun on the Margaret Hunt Hill Bridge, a soaring structure by Spanish architect Santiago Calatrava that will extend the Woodall Rodgers Freeway west over the Trinity to Singleton Boulevard.
It's the first of three Calatrava "signature" bridges over the Trinity that planners hope to see completed someday. The others are at Interstate 30 and Interstate 35E.
The Margaret Hunt Hill Bridge will cost an estimated $115 million, according to the city. It's being built with $28 million in city bond proceeds, some funds from state and federal agencies, and a lot of private donations, notably from the family of Ms. Hill, the oil heiress and Dallas philanthropist who died this summer.
When the bridge is completed, the plan is to close the adjacent Continental Avenue viaduct to cars, allowing only pedestrians and bicyclists to use it.
From the east (downtown) side, the Continental bridge would provide a ready way into the park from the West End, Victory and Uptown.
On the West Dallas side, the city would build a "gateway park" that would afford spectacular park views, framed by the downtown skyline in the distance and the Calatrava bridge in the foreground.
"That becomes the Dallas postcard," Mr. Lehner said.
People walking or biking over the bridge would be directly above one of the man-made lakes that are planned as key features of the park.
"The experience," Mr. Lehner said, "will be unlike anything that you can see now in the city."
Oak Cliff
The West Dallas gateway park is one of several spots on that side from which people could enter the park. Another is a planned observation deck that would be built in North Oak Cliff, near Beckley Avenue and Commerce Street, so people could come and watch the progress as the park is built.
"It's the proverbial hole in the construction fence," Mr. Lehner said.
But really, said Bob Stimson, a former City Council member who heads the Oak Cliff Chamber of Commerce, almost anyplace along the levee on the Oak Cliff side would provide ready entry.
"When it comes to accessing the park, Oak Cliff is in a perfect position," he said. "At any number of spots, you'll be able to just walk up over the levees and enjoy this park."
He said that unfettered access is one reason the chamber supports the current Trinity River project plan, which puts all of the highway lanes on the downtown side of the river.
Mr. Stimson said he hoped that Oak Cliff's open access to the Trinity park would "give us a tremendous advantage in the eyes of developers. They'll be salivating at the chance to build over here."
TRACKING THE TRINITY TOLLWAY VOTE
What am I voting on? Passage of Proposition 1 would create a Dallas ordinance prohibiting the construction of a high-speed toll road within the Trinity River Corridor's earthen levees. If the proposition passes, any road built within the corridor would be limited to four total lanes with a 35 mph speed limit.
When to vote: Early voting on Proposition 1 begins Monday and runs through Nov. 2. Regular voting for the referendum is Nov. 6. Only registered Dallas voters may participate.
A "FOR" vote means: You want to prohibit the high-speed toll road's construction within the Trinity River's levees.
An "AGAINST" vote means: You want to preserve the current Trinity River Corridor plan, which calls for construction of the high-speed toll road within the levees.
What supporters of Proposition 1 say: A high-speed toll road would irreparably harm an adjacent urban park also planned as part of the city's broader Trinity River Corridor project. The road could be built outside the levees, along Industrial Boulevard, or elsewhere.
Supporters of the proposition say that since Dallas is endowed with a massive, empty greenspace in its city center, it should use its prime opportunity to develop it to create an urban oasis, unadulterated by a loud, unsightly highway carrying tens of thousands of vehicles each day.
They also say the toll road may be prone to flooding and would lead to more air pollution in downtown Dallas.
What opponents of Proposition 1 say: Removing the toll road from the larger Trinity project is akin to yanking on threads from a suit: It'll soon unravel.
Private funding for the park element, as well as county, state and federal funding for transportation components both related and unrelated, are contingent on the toll road being built as planned. Passage of Proposition 1 could also delay the project, which was originally passed in 1998, for years.
Opponents of the proposition say that building the road elsewhere could cost hundreds of millions of dollars more, and not building it at all would lead to unacceptable traffic congestion in downtown Dallas.
Voter turnout? Both sides expect it to be low, meaning individual votes carry more strength than in a well-attended election.
Designers of the Trinity River project have an ambitious vision.
They say they want to see the river transformed "from the city's back alley to its front yard."
The central element of that vision, for many people, is the proposed downtown Trinity River park. With its lakes, river meanders, hiking trails, canoeing course, greenbelts and promenades, the downtown park, at roughly 100 acres, is often extolled as having the potential to become Dallas' Central Park, or Dallas' River Walk, or Dallas' Town Lake – an urban oasis that will draw visitors from near and far.
Also Online
Interactive map: Trinity toll road issues
Map: Trinity toll road issues (.pdf)
Archive: Learn more about the Trinity toll road fight
But there's at least one big obstacle to that vision – or two, actually – having nothing to do with the Nov. 6 referendum on whether to build a toll road in the park.
Unlike Central Park, or the San Antonio River Walk, or Austin's Town Lake, the Trinity is cut off from the rest of the city by its levees – "two 30-foot mounds of dirt separated by a half-mile of weeds," in the memorable phrase of Paul Lehner, director of planning and development for the city's Trinity River Corridor Project office.
"We can't do exactly what they've done in San Antonio," said Mr. Lehner. "We won't have people who can just step out their doors and be right at the water, because of the levees. For that reason, providing connectivity to the park through a number of points has been very high on our list."
The levees, built in the 1920s and '30s to protect downtown against flooding, aren't going anywhere. In fact, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers plans to raise the levees by about two feet over the next few years.
The corps has said emphatically that whatever else is done to the river corridor – park, lakes, toll road, no toll road – flood protection remains its primary function.
So to get to the park, folks would have to find ways over those "mounds of dirt."
Dallas being Dallas, many of them would drive. Their access to the park depends very much on what happens Nov. 6, when voters will weigh in on Proposition 1, a ballot measure to scrap the high-speed toll road now planned inside the levees.
Whether that toll road is built – and, if it isn't, what gets built instead – will affect many aspects of the Trinity project, from its funding sources to its build-out schedule to the aesthetics of the park to transportation through and to the central city. One of few things that both sides agree on in the toll road debate is that a lot of uncertainty looms – and a lot of recalibration will have to take place – if Proposition 1 passes and the toll road is scrapped.
In ways big or small, the vote could alter almost everything and anything about the park. So all of what follows is open to change. There are lots of things we simply don't know about how the Trinity project might look.
But for now, let us forget about toll roads, figuratively park our cars, lace up our walking shoes and take a stroll through some of the plans for ways that Dallas residents would be able to get to, and enjoy, their park on foot.
Reunion Overlook
This would be one of the prime entry points to the downtown park – and, Mr. Lehner hopes, a gathering point in and of itself.
Reunion Boulevard is the short roadway off Houston Street that now passes the Hyatt Regency Dallas, Reunion Tower and Reunion Arena before dead-ending at Industrial Boulevard.
Under its plans, the city would extend the boulevard another few hundred feet to the west, to the river levee. There, a building of some sort could be built – there is no final design now – at the level of the levee top. The building could house an information center, perhaps a history museum of the Trinity River, perhaps concession stands. From it, there would be "vertical access" via elevators or stairways, down into the river bottoms. At that point, visitors would be in the park, at the promenade along the water.
Mr. Lehner told a City Council committee last week that the Reunion Overlook could evolve into the main "linkage between downtown and the Trinity Corridor."
The trails
The park is to include a network of trails – some near the water and some, perhaps, along the tops of the levees.
Near Sylvan Avenue, these trails would connect with the Trinity Strand Trail, a new trail network being built just outside the levees, behind the Stemmons Freeway along the original, meandering channel of the Trinity River.
The Trinity Strand Trail, in turn, would eventually hook up with the Katy Trail at a point just north of American Airlines Center.
That means hikers, joggers, bicyclists and roller-skaters could come down the Katy Trail from as far away as Southern Methodist University – and eventually farther, as the Katy Trail expands – and get into the Trinity park.
And from the Knox-Henderson neighborhood south, those visitors would never have to cross a vehicular road, said Mike Kutner, chairman of Friends of the Trinity Strand Trail, a group raising private money to complete the trail.
He also noted that there are 13 hotels, including the huge Hilton Anatole, along Stemmons Freeway within a short walk of the Trinity Strand.
"For visitors to our city to be able to walk out of their hotel and get on these trails and enter the park – that would be fantastic," he said.
DART
The Dallas Area Rapid Transit station at Eighth and Corinth streets in Oak Cliff is the southernmost station that jointly serves DART's red and blue rail lines.
The station is close to the Trinity, near where the downtown levees stop.
It's also adjacent to an abandoned railroad trestle. That old railroad bridge, city officials said, could be converted to a pedestrian bridge. Visitors from as far away as Garland or Plano could ride DART to Eighth and Corinth and use the pedestrian bridge as a way into the river bottoms.
At that point, they'd be near the northern boundary of the Great Trinity Forest, an unspoiled hardwood stand covering several thousand acres that the city is assembling. A canoe launch into the river channel is also planned at Moore Gateway Park, near the trestle.
Continental Avenue
Work has just begun on the Margaret Hunt Hill Bridge, a soaring structure by Spanish architect Santiago Calatrava that will extend the Woodall Rodgers Freeway west over the Trinity to Singleton Boulevard.
It's the first of three Calatrava "signature" bridges over the Trinity that planners hope to see completed someday. The others are at Interstate 30 and Interstate 35E.
The Margaret Hunt Hill Bridge will cost an estimated $115 million, according to the city. It's being built with $28 million in city bond proceeds, some funds from state and federal agencies, and a lot of private donations, notably from the family of Ms. Hill, the oil heiress and Dallas philanthropist who died this summer.
When the bridge is completed, the plan is to close the adjacent Continental Avenue viaduct to cars, allowing only pedestrians and bicyclists to use it.
From the east (downtown) side, the Continental bridge would provide a ready way into the park from the West End, Victory and Uptown.
On the West Dallas side, the city would build a "gateway park" that would afford spectacular park views, framed by the downtown skyline in the distance and the Calatrava bridge in the foreground.
"That becomes the Dallas postcard," Mr. Lehner said.
People walking or biking over the bridge would be directly above one of the man-made lakes that are planned as key features of the park.
"The experience," Mr. Lehner said, "will be unlike anything that you can see now in the city."
Oak Cliff
The West Dallas gateway park is one of several spots on that side from which people could enter the park. Another is a planned observation deck that would be built in North Oak Cliff, near Beckley Avenue and Commerce Street, so people could come and watch the progress as the park is built.
"It's the proverbial hole in the construction fence," Mr. Lehner said.
But really, said Bob Stimson, a former City Council member who heads the Oak Cliff Chamber of Commerce, almost anyplace along the levee on the Oak Cliff side would provide ready entry.
"When it comes to accessing the park, Oak Cliff is in a perfect position," he said. "At any number of spots, you'll be able to just walk up over the levees and enjoy this park."
He said that unfettered access is one reason the chamber supports the current Trinity River project plan, which puts all of the highway lanes on the downtown side of the river.
Mr. Stimson said he hoped that Oak Cliff's open access to the Trinity park would "give us a tremendous advantage in the eyes of developers. They'll be salivating at the chance to build over here."
TRACKING THE TRINITY TOLLWAY VOTE
What am I voting on? Passage of Proposition 1 would create a Dallas ordinance prohibiting the construction of a high-speed toll road within the Trinity River Corridor's earthen levees. If the proposition passes, any road built within the corridor would be limited to four total lanes with a 35 mph speed limit.
When to vote: Early voting on Proposition 1 begins Monday and runs through Nov. 2. Regular voting for the referendum is Nov. 6. Only registered Dallas voters may participate.
A "FOR" vote means: You want to prohibit the high-speed toll road's construction within the Trinity River's levees.
An "AGAINST" vote means: You want to preserve the current Trinity River Corridor plan, which calls for construction of the high-speed toll road within the levees.
What supporters of Proposition 1 say: A high-speed toll road would irreparably harm an adjacent urban park also planned as part of the city's broader Trinity River Corridor project. The road could be built outside the levees, along Industrial Boulevard, or elsewhere.
Supporters of the proposition say that since Dallas is endowed with a massive, empty greenspace in its city center, it should use its prime opportunity to develop it to create an urban oasis, unadulterated by a loud, unsightly highway carrying tens of thousands of vehicles each day.
They also say the toll road may be prone to flooding and would lead to more air pollution in downtown Dallas.
What opponents of Proposition 1 say: Removing the toll road from the larger Trinity project is akin to yanking on threads from a suit: It'll soon unravel.
Private funding for the park element, as well as county, state and federal funding for transportation components both related and unrelated, are contingent on the toll road being built as planned. Passage of Proposition 1 could also delay the project, which was originally passed in 1998, for years.
Opponents of the proposition say that building the road elsewhere could cost hundreds of millions of dollars more, and not building it at all would lead to unacceptable traffic congestion in downtown Dallas.
Voter turnout? Both sides expect it to be low, meaning individual votes carry more strength than in a well-attended election.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
