DFW Regional Concerned Citizens

What is Chesapeake doing at this Barnett Shale gas well in Arlington, Texas?

2011-12-16T03:08:00.000-06:00

What is Chesapeake doing at this Barnett Shale gas well in Arlington, Texas?

Westchester Gasette: Dam and Double Dam!

2011-09-22T18:17:00.000-06:00

Westchester Gasette: Dam and Double Dam!

Westchester Gasette: Oh, My.

2011-09-22T18:09:00.000-06:00

Westchester Gasette: Oh, My.: So here's Part 2 of that story about an Arlington Church's business deal with Chesapeake: Wednesday, August 31, 2011 High Point Church...

Westchester Gasette: What the Quack is Going On?

2011-09-22T18:06:00.000-06:00

Westchester Gasette: What the Quack is Going On?: The 5,000-member High Point Church was founded in 2000 by Simons and his wife, April, whose brother is Joel Osteen , well-k...

Obama Tax Plan Would Ask More of Millionaires | Truthout

2011-09-18T13:00:00.000-06:00

Obama Tax Plan Would Ask More of Millionaires | Truthout

Fracking near dams could cause catastrophic event per US Army Corps Engineers

2011-09-08T13:03:00.000-06:00

Fracking near dams could cause catastrophic event per US Army Corps Engineers

Westchester Gasette: It's a Hurricane

2011-08-28T18:01:00.000-06:00

Westchester Gasette: It's a Hurricane: A LANDMAN on the Arlington, TX City Council?? Or What Is It, Pray Tell? The Councilman does have a very nice résumé. Here's how you,...

Roy LaVerne Brooks

2010-10-10T21:50:00.002-06:00

Roy Laverne Brooks for Tarrant County Justice of the Peace Precinct 6 from George Wada on Vimeo.

Zoning

2010-10-06T03:34:00.002-06:00

NEW YORK TIMES QUOTATION OF THE DAY (applies also to life in the Barnett Shale ... only we don't have a ferry boat)

"The quality of life that we came here for was quiet. You don’t live in a place where you have to take an hour-and-15-minute ferry ride to live next to an industrial park. And that’s where we are right now."
CHERYL LINDGREN, who lives near wind turbines in Vinalhaven, Me.

The Truth About Texas Air Quality, TCEQ and EPA

2010-09-07T17:02:00.000-06:00

UTArlington Campus Gas Drilling Site Spill 25,300 ppm Salinity near John...

2010-08-14T17:37:00.000-06:00

TTC-35 officially declared DEAD by Feds

2010-08-10T20:19:00.003-06:00

By Terri Hall - TURF - Aug. 2010

Attorney Fred Kelly Grant, who's with TURF partner, American Stewards of Liberty, was instrumental in forming the Eastern Central Texas Sub-Regional Planning Commission (dubbed 391 commissions) that's credited with this victory. He's analyzed the Federal Highway Administration official Record of Decision (ROD) below.

"The Federal Highway Administration has pounded the final nail in the coffin of the Trans-Texas Corridor-35. The Agency’s final Record of Decision, issued on July 20, 2010 selected the No Action Alternative but went further in ordering that 'a study area for the TTC-35 Project will not be chosen and the TTC-35 Project is concluded.' Twice the ROD states that the 'project is concluded,' and six times it states that 'the project ends.' If TxDOT attempted to revive the 35 Corridor project and use the same EIS, this ROD would provide the base for issuance by a United States District Judge of a Declaratory Judgment prohibiting the action.” -- Fred Kelly Grant, Attorney, American Stewards of Liberty

Margaret Byfield, Co-Founder of American Stewards of Liberty, added:

"They didn’t withdraw the study as requested, but wrote the ROD in such a way that TxDOT cannot use this study in the future."

The following is from Insider Texas Government Strategic Partnerships, Inc. Link to article directly here...
FHA declares Trans-Texas Corridor proposal officially dead

Latest I-35 project includes expansion to six lanes through areas of Central Texas

The death certificate for the Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC) has officially been signed.

The oft-maligned TTC project pushed by Gov. Rick Perry would have routed traffic around population centers and provided a broad corridor to link major cities. It also would have included toll roads for cars and trucks, space parallel to the corridor for utilities and tracks for freight and passenger trains.

The demise of the project began when public hearings were held throughout the state. Thousands of citizens voiced their opposition to the TTC, citing the fact that too much private property would be taken for the project. Others objected to plans to involve a consortium that included a Spanish company for part of the $175 billion, 4,000-mile network and wanted more of the proceeds from any toll roads to go into state coffers.

After hearing the complaints, Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) Executive Director Amadeo Saenz, in 2009 declared, "The Trans-Texas Corridor as it is known, no longer exists."

And just last week, the Federal Highway Administration (FHA) issued an official decision of "no action" on the TTC proposal, which prevents the project from going forward. It also cancels the planning comprehensive development agreement between TxDOT and the Spanish construction company.

"A study area for the TTC-35 project will not be chosen," reads the decision, and the TTC-35 project is concluded." While the FHA acknowledged that "transportation needs exist" along the corridor, "those needs will have to be addressed by transportation projects other than TTC-35." The FHA decision was based on comments at public hearings that decried a possible reduction in land values. The federal agency noted that the magnitude of the potential impact on land values was "unprecedented" because of the size of the study area - 400 to 500 miles long and 5,000-6,000 square miles in area - because of the approximately 1 million people who could be affected by the project and the projected 50 years necessary to complete the project.

Although the TTC proposal is officially dead, segments of the I-35 corridor are currently under construction as a project continues that will expand the interstate to six lanes through Central Texas from Hillsboro to San Antonio. TxDOT has already put $1 billion in the bank toward that project. The nearly 100-mile length of the project is expected to take three to five years to complete.

On Monday, a third 2010 project on the Central Texas plan began in Bell County, where the expansion to six lanes will cover an area from FM 2484 north of Salado to Highway 190 in Belton. The 8-mile, $107 million project (paid for in part by federal Recovery Act funds) is expected to be completed in approximately four years.

Earlier this month, a project began between Hillsboro and Abbott. It is the first stage of the widening of I-35 in that area to three lanes in each direction. The first phase includes moving and widening the frontage roads along the highway. And in May, two ramps onto I-35 in Waco were closed and will remain closed for approximately one year as new southbound lanes are constructed.

As TxDOT continues to seek more input from citizens, Texans are helping develop a plan for the future of the I-35 corridor. The result – MY 35, a plan featuring local input based on local needs.

Texas teacher retirement funds invested in risky toll road schemes

2010-07-14T01:53:00.000-06:00

Texas teacher retirement funds invested in risky toll road schemes

Divided Fort Worth office of SEC was plagued by inaction

2010-07-11T18:10:00.007-06:00

BY DARREN BARBEE - July 11, 2010 - Fort Worth Star Telegram
FORT WORTH -- Julie Preuitt is into NASCAR, stopping con men and doing what she believes is right -- even when it meant flushing her career down the SEC commode.
She was an SEC branch chief examining securities brokers and dealers when a routine look at a company put her on high alert. Preuitt believed her staff had found a scam: An off-shore bank was offering CDs with payoffs that were, to her thinking, "absolutely ludicrous."
It should have been a Tom Clancy moment. But in the Fort Worth regional office of the Securities and Exchange Commission where Preuitt worked, leaders regarded the case as what they called a "goat screw." They passed on orders to kill it.
Snap a picture: It's June 2009. The SEC announces bad news for a Texas billionaire. He's being sued, accusing of running a Ponzi scheme that any aspiring Bernie Madoff could appreciate. Singled out for hard work on the case was the Fort Worth office. Plaudits went to many, including two high-ranking Fort Worth officials.
What the picture doesn't show: The lawsuit against R. Allen Stanford came 12 years and about $7 billion too late.
And the praise didn't go to Preuitt, who first raised concerns in 1997. Instead, two people who pushed Preuitt aside enjoyed the acclaim. That is, until it began biting them on the ankles.
Soon after the announcement, the SEC's watchdog, the inspector general, began getting complaints that the office had not diligently pursued a probe until the SEC came under fire for failing to spot Madoff's Ponzi scheme.
Now, a starkly different image of the Fort Worth office is emerging from the watchdog report, government documents obtained by the Star-Telegram, and interviews with current and former staff members.
They show a troubled organization where senior managers for years resisted efforts to pursue complex cases in favor of the quick and easy that could run up its stats -- and they badly botched the Stanford case in its early years.

"The commission is very interested in a 'fraud of the day.' And [Stanford] wasn't ever the fraud of the day," Preuitt told the inspector general.
Stanford steadfastly maintains he did nothing wrong.

While Preuitt and the examination staff repeatedly flagged the Stanford companies as a Ponzi scheme, enforcement attorneys wouldn't budge. They ignored tips, largely disregarded state and federal concerns, and tried to fob off the matter to a private, less powerful financial regulator. The enforcement staff failed twice to read examiners' reports on Stanford.
All the while, investor losses swelled, the watchdog report says.
While the Fort Worth office was once gun-shy, SEC officials say those failings have largely been resolved since leadership changed and investigative powers were streamlined. They also say that the matter was complex, entangled in international law and a criminal investigation by the Justice Department, among other obstacles.

"I would say the public has every reason to be confident in both the performance and productivity of that office," said Robert Khuzami, head of the SEC's enforcement division in Washington

"To the extent that there are personnel or other issues, those will be dealt with appropriately," he said. But "the performance of the office has been overwhelmingly positive."
Less focus is now placed on competing with other SEC offices' statistics for the number of cases closed, an SEC document says.
And Rose Romero, a former assistant U.S. prosecutor who now leads the Fort Worth office, said it is operating at its peak in spotting and stopping fraud, even though it has limited resources and a broad region.

"I think right now our staff is probably the best qualified staff that this office has probably ever seen," she said.

The office has rolled out some solid cases. Last year, it halted what it called frauds of $31 million, $24 million and $8.4 million, among others in Texas. An investigator even used Google to root out fraud at a major company.
Yet Romero and Kimberly Garber, who beat out Preuitt to become associate district administrator for examinations, are criticized by current and former staff members as being even more concerned with style over substance. When Preuitt opposed their decision to conduct quick-hit examination reviews, the office divided into two camps.
And Romero and Garber struck back, according to the inspector general.
Some staff members, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said they have no confidence in senior leadership. In Fort Worth, the office's strength had historically been in people like Preuitt, who were impolitic, willing to speak their minds and push co-workers and the D.C. bureaucracy to get things done. Management instead wants "tools to do away with people who have a dissenting opinion," one employee said.
And a lingering issue is how Romero has depicted the Stanford investigation. Testimony she gave to a U.S. Senate committee conflicts with records of her own office.
Apparent red flags
To its earliest investors, Stanford International Bank must have looked like some West Indies gold mine. The Antigua bank offered CDs paying interest rates markedly higher than those of U.S. banks. The Stanford Group Co., which registered with the SEC as a broker-dealer and investment adviser in 1995, was paid high referral fees for selling the CDs.
As early as the mid-1990s, the Texas State Securities Board passed along a tip to the SEC about Robert Allen Stanford's companies.

"We actually found problems with Stanford," said Texas Securities Commissioner Denise Voigt Crawford.

By 1997, the Stanford companies caught Preuitt's attention. She wondered how the bank had gained nearly $307 million in deposits in a couple of years.
The watchdog report on Stanford details dogged efforts by Preuitt and the examination staff over ensuring years to find answers and prod enforcement to take action.
The first examination found apparent red flags. Preuitt concluded that the CDs were fraudulent. The staff labeled it a "Possible Ponzi scheme." The examination report was forwarded to enforcement, where it sat for eight months.

Read more in the Fort Worth Star Telegram

PolitiFact Texas | Perry: State has cut ozone 22%, nitrogen oxide emissions 46%

2010-06-27T20:08:00.003-06:00

In short, said UT's Allen,

Perry's ozone figure is in line with what the agency and university researchers have found. "All of these measurements paint a consistent picture. Ozone concentrations are going down across the state," he said.

Still, some parts of Texas have struggled to meet federal ozone standards. Three regions are currently designated in nonattainment under a limit set by EPA in 1997: Dallas-Forth Worth (nine counties), Houston (eight counties), and Beaumont-Port Arthur (four counties). According to TCEQ, the Beaumont area is being reclassified as in compliance and the Houston area met the standard for the first time in 2009.

But a tightening of EPA standards, expected in August, will likely put several more areas, including the five-county Austin region, out of compliance.

Next, to what degree were the reductions in ozone and NOx achieved by the state's "clean-air program"?

Al Armendariz of Dallas, administrator of EPA's multi-state Region 6, which includes Texas, credited all levels of government with hastening the ozone improvements, especially in Dallas and Houston. As examples, he pointed to enforcement actions taken against industry by the federal government that led to facilities' agreeing to major cuts in emissions, as well as state initiatives.

The state touts incentive-driven programs such as its Emission Reduction Plan, which has spent more than $760 million since 2000 to help companies retrofit or replace more than 12,000 diesel vehicles with cleaner-burning ones.

Despite the ozone improvements, a report released April 28 by the American Lung Association ranked the Houston area as the seventh-worst in the nation for ozone pollution and Dallas-Fort Worth 13th. (The worst six places for ozone were in California.) Of the 30 Texas counties graded by the lung association on their ozone pollution, 21 -- including Travis -- received F's.

So how does Perry's statement hold up?

The governor accurately cites recent improvements in the state's ozone levels. As for the NOx emissions contributing to ozone levels, his statistic refers to only one source -- industrial -- which he did not note. Nearly three-quarters comes from other sources.

Whether the state gets the credit for those improvements is another issue. Even if TCEQ is responsible for the drop in industrial NOx emissions, federal efforts -- namely vehicle emission regulations -- also have helped lower ozone levels. Significantly, the state's ozone-related programs exist to help Texas comply with federal expectations.

We rate Perry's statement as Half True.

Texas Pipeline eminent domain law cited in PA as how not to do it!

2010-06-27T13:52:00.002-06:00

Want a big natural gas pipeline in your backyard?
By Heather Long - The Patriot-News - June

This is about natural gas pipelines. Pipelines that could be going through your backyard even if you object.
If you’re like me, you are the type who flips the electric switch and expects the lights to come on immediately. I don’t give much thought to all the wires, transmission lines, power stations and generating plants, etc., along the way.
Why does it matter?

But as Pennsylvania is set to become the “Saudi Arabia of natural gas” in the Marcellus Shale region, it turns out we have to start caring not just about what happens at the wells, but about the entire chain of natural gas production and transportation.
That includes caring about those pipelines.
In Texas, pipeline companies can invoke what is known as eminent domain at various times to build their transport network. If the pipeline company says it needs to run a pipe over someone’s land, officials go to a judge who helps determine what the “market rate” is to use your land and then it’s a done deal, whether the homeowner thinks it’s a good idea or not.
Needless to say, the use of eminent domain hasn’t gone all that smoothly in Texas, especially in the wealthy neighborhoods of Fort Worth where Barnett Shale is.
There’s been such a stink that the Texas Legislature tightened rules on where pipelines can go and how they get laid in metropolitan areas.
This isn’t just a Lone Star State phenomenon. It could happen right here in Pennsylvania.
In fact, it already has.
Six pipeline companies already are registered in Pennsylvania as public utilities, which gives them the ability to invoke eminent domain. These six have been around for a while and mainly carry motor and fuel oil, but Marcellus Shale is opening up a whole new business opportunity.
One Marcellus pipeline company, Laser Marcellus Gathering Co. from Houston, applied in January to the state’s Public Utility Commission for classification as a public utility, too.
Companies, of course, don’t always resort to eminent domain. It’s a headache to get judges and lawyers involved, not to mention sometimes bad PR.
But if the PUC grants Laser Marcellus public utility status, the option will be there, potentially opening up the floodgates for eminent domain in our state.
At a minimum, the PUC should require more stringent reporting and oversight of any company that gets eminent domain rights. Even better would be for the PUC to rethink whether companies such as Laser Marcellus that are building pipelines mainly to transport gas to other states should even get public utility status, which was designed with in-state providers in mind.
But eminent domain is just the tip of the iceberg.
At present, no one in Pennsylvania oversees gas pipelines at all.
There are federal laws on the books that set basic standards, but no agency is on the ground inspecting.
In most states, the equivalent of the PUC oversees pipeline construction and operation. In fact, that’s how it’s done in all 41 natural gas-drilling states with the exception of Alaska and Pennsylvania.
Are we that much smarter than everyone else?
No. We’re just waiting on our Legislature to act. All it needs to do is grant the PUC the right to enforce the federal law here in Pennsylvania.
The good news is that giving PUC the jurisdiction is supported by environmental groups and most of the gas industry, two sides that don’t see eye to eye on much.
So I hope legislators took note when various representatives from both sides testified before the PUC this week, almost all in support of the PUC getting authority to regulate.
The PUC deserves a huge amount of credit for taking up these issues now. It is getting ahead of the curve, something we don’t often see in state government.

Because most natural gas pipelines are relatively low pressure, but what is expected to come from Marcellus Shale is going to be high pressure.
In the words of PUC chairman James Cawley, “The potential for disaster is greater.”
The final issue is the dirty detail: Do we regulate pipelines in rural areas? The federal legislation says no. Don’t bother with areas that are 10 or fewer dwellings per mile.
But we must learn from other big drilling states. Colorado and Oklahoma have enacted subsequent laws including rural areas in basic pipeline monitoring and marking.
The Legislature needs to get up to speed on pipelines, and it needs to do so soon.
Let’s give the PUC the authority over all monitoring, including rural areas. It’s time to flip the switch on basic oversight.
Heather Long is deputy editorial page editor. 255-8104 or hlong@pnco.com.

Fort Worth ethics panel questions fairness of having industry representatives on air quality committee

2010-06-25T21:31:00.005-06:00

BY MIKE LEE - Fort Wortht Star Telegram - June 25, 2010

FORT WORTH -- It may be an inherent conflict of interest to allow gas company employees to serve on committees that oversee their industry, the city's Ethics Review Committee ruled Thursday.
The panel made the ruling in a case about the makeup of the city's Air Quality Study Committee, which was formed to examine potentially toxic emissions at natural gas sites.
If upheld, the ruling could have far-reaching ramifications because most of the city's regulations on gas drilling were written by committees that included representatives from the gas industry. At least one of the companies plans to appeal the ruling to the full Fort Worth City Council.
The council appointed the air quality committee in March to find a way to determine the level of toxic emissions around gas sites, and its findings could lead to new gas drilling regulations in the city.
The 10-member committee includes three representatives from major drilling companies: Devon Energy, XTO Energy and Chesapeake Energy.
Chesapeake Vice President Julie Wilson said the company will vigorously appeal.
"Chesapeake finds it ludicrous that three individuals employed by energy companies have been cited for an 'ethics conflict' due to their service on a city-appointed task force," Wilson said. "It is an affront to every citizen who serves at the request of the City Council and brings into question the conflict other members on the same task force may have, not to mention numerous other citizens on other task forces."
Jim Ashford, an east Fort Worth resident who is suing Chesapeake over noise and air pollution from a compressor station near his house, filed the ethics complaint in the spring. He said it was improper for the gas companies to have representatives on a committee that is studying pollution potentially caused by their industry.
Albon Head, an attorney who represented all three gas company employees, said Ashford should have complained to the City Council, which appointed the air quality committee. He pointed out that Ashford didn't complain about other members of the committee who have a vested interest in its work, including an environmental lawyer and a scientist who works for a nonprofit environmental group.
Head said conflict-of-interest rules are meant to keep people from representing their own companies before city boards or profiting from city contracts. Neither of those situations exist in this instance, he said.

"They are not representing their companies before the [air quality] board," Head said. "There is no evidence that these members received any benefit."

Ashford stressed the importance of barring the gas industry from having control over the city's regulations. "We have one attorney representing all three individuals -- this would indicate the three members are speaking as one voice," he said.
The gas company employees didn't testify. Head said outside the committee room that he didn't know why the three companies had hired one attorney.

'Wearing two hats'
The ethics committee sided with Ashford after a three-hour hearing. Rebecca Lucas, a lawyer on the ethics committee, said that the gas employees have a "total absence of malice" but that "the level of their loyalty to their employers has put them in a position of wearing two hats."

It's unclear whether the three employees can stay on the committee, because the Ethics Review Committee does not have the authority to remove them.
The three members can appeal the decision to the City Council, which appointed the air quality committee.

"We'll have to look at those issues and advise the committee and the council," City Attorney David Yett said.

Susan Alanis, the city's planning and development director, noted that it's not unusual for industry representatives to get such appointments, and that the committee's decisions have not been unduly swayed by votes from the three gas company representatives. "We have committees all the time that include professionals" who are affected by the city's ordinances, Alanis said.
Royalty issues
The ethics committee ruled against Ashford on another complaint. He argued that Councilmen Jungus Jordan and Danny Scarth shouldn't vote on issues related to gas drilling because they receive gas royalties.
Jordan's wife inherited an interest in the mineral rights to a Johnson County farm and gets royalties from Chesapeake. Scarth said his parents gave him and his siblings a share of gas royalties from XTO earned from acreage they own in Burleson. Jordan routinely recuses himself from votes involving Chesapeake and Scarth recuses himself from issues involving XTO.
Ashford said the two should not vote on any gas industry issue, including the city's drilling ordinance and the air quality committee.
But Ashford didn't cite those votes as evidence. Instead, he showed a videotape of a Feb. 2 work session in which the council discussed appointing the air quality committee. Some council members wanted to appoint a task force to revisit the entire gas drilling ordinance, including the setbacks between gas wells and houses. Scarth and Jordan argued against it.

"We need to be very careful about the idea of opening up a gas drilling task force," Scarth said.

No vote was taken, although the council decided informally not to revise the ordinance.

"I think Mr. Ashford confuses general discussion [in a work session] with the council voting on an issue," said Don Herrmann, who represented Jordan and Scarth.
Jordan and Scarth said they relied on a legal opinion that allows them to continue to vote on general issues related to gas drilling.
"I've fully disclosed my financial position and followed the directions of the city attorney," Jordan said
.
Scarth said, "Just because someone doesn't like what we do from a policy standpoint doesn't mean it's an ethics violation."

The committee sided with the council members, although they said Ashford can revise his complaint to include specific votes. "At the present, I think we have no choice but to say it's insufficient," Chairwoman Hortencia Laguna said.
MIKE LEE, 817-390-7539

Read more: http://www.star-telegram.com/2010/06/24/2292054_p2/fort-worth-ethics-panel-questions.html#ixzz0rvW2lpuo

Read more:
Read more in the Fort Worth Star Telegram

Complaint over Gov. Perry's Mansion Spending

2010-06-23T11:18:00.003-06:00

By Fox4 - VMYFOXDFW.COM - July 22, 2010

AUSTIN, Texas - A government watchdog group is filing a complaint against GOP Gov. Rick Perry's campaign for failing to disclose how it spends money at the governor's mansion and at his interim residence.

Since 2001, Perry's campaign has spent more than $800,000 on "mansion expenditures."

Texans for Public Justice said in a complaint Tuesday that Perry's campaign violated disclosure laws by failing to itemize the spending.

Records obtained this year by The Associated Press show Perry has used campaign money to throw parties, buy food and drink, and pay for cable TV and other services at his official residence.

Perry and his wife, Anita, were in a rental property in 2008 when an arsonist set fire to the under-renovation governor's mansion. Nobody has been arrested. The Perrys are still in a rental house.

Value Of TxDOT Audit Being Called Into Question

2010-06-14T22:47:00.005-06:00

By Reeve Hamilton and Julian Aguilar - AUSTIN (The Texas Tribune) ― Jun 9, 2010
As the Texas Department of Transportation heads into a hearing today to review a highly critical 628-page audit with members of the House Transportation Committee, the very value of Chicago-based consulting agency Grant Thornton's $2 million report is being called into question.
The audit said that TxDOT's senior leaders were not inclined toward meaningful self-analysis due to "a deep-seated belief that TxDOT is doing all the right things." But TxDOT Executive Director Amadeo Saenz appeared on Tuesday to welcome the report, saying in a special Transportation Commission meeting that the auditors had done "a good job of collecting and analyzing stakeholder expectations across a number of levels."
Not all observers of the Texas transportation scene agree. "[The report] was not as in-depth as I'd like to see," said state Rep. Joe Pickett, D-El Paso, the chairman of the Transportation Committee. In a statement issued shortly after the report's release, state Sen. Kirk Watson, D-Austin, said the document was hardly revelatory for those who follow transportation. It includes long-standing criticisms of the agency, including the widely held perception that its senior management is "not addressing the big issues … not trusting other TxDOT staff … not setting clear expectations or goals … not being open to feedback … [and] lacking respect for governing bodies."

"No surprises," Pickett said. "It's just ratifying what most of us already knew existed."

Pickett said he would have liked a more detaied breakdown of TxDOT's financing and a more thorough examination of "who does what to who" within the organization — concerns he will likely make known when representatives from Grant Thornton testify before his committee today. He also questions the auditors' heavy reliance on employee interviews, which he says aren't likely to be objective and could have been done by TxDOT internally. And he's frustrated that, in a study "this in-depth and this long" — it's been nearly a year since TxDOT commissioned it — no updates were provided to TxDOT or legislators on the auditors progress and findings prior to the release of the final report. Pickett was also surprised to see TxDOT administrators raked over the coals while the commission that oversees the agency got off comparatively easy.

"For the last six years, the commission has been dictating … to the administration," he said. "I personally believe the administration is acting upon the commission's desires, but the commission came out of this unscathed."

Unlike Pickett, state Sen. John Carona, R-Dallas, was pleased with the report and encouraged by Saenz's general acceptance of its findings, said Steven Polunsky, the staff director of the Senate Transportation Committee, which Carona chairs.
"[Carona] fully expects the commission to proceed immediately with the remedies recommended in the audit," Polunsky said. "Change is a hard process. It takes the right leadership and some outside oversight."
One of the audit's central themes was a need to shake up the "singular, deeply entrenched culture" that has developed over the agency's 93 years in operation. Saenz agreed with Grant Thornton that the traditional "TxDOT way" was failing to meet expectations, saying the agency will continue to make internal changes to better align its operations to its mission. "There are some things we should have recognized sooner and managed to adjust our operations to meet our customers' expectations," Saenz said. "As we move forward, we must commit to doing better."
But he said some major issues — like future funding for roads — are beyond TxDOT's control. "We've said it over and over again, but it bears repeating: Unless new funding sources are in place by 2012, no additional mobility projects will be added to the agency's plans," Saenz said.
How big a funding hole?
Like so much about TxDOT depicted in the Grant Thornton report, even the amount of funding needed is hazy. The audit posits that in 2040, Texas' population will be roughly the same as present-day California, with approximately 36 million people. But just how much road spending will be necessary to accommodate that growth remains a point of contention.
According to a review of future transportation funding needs by the 2030 Committee, a 12-member research team appointed two years ago by Transportation Commissioner Deirdre Delisi, Texas will need to invest about $315 billion within the next two decades to maintain current congestion levels. That amounts to roughly $14 billion a year — in 2008 dollars. Though careful not to speculate on the effects of future legislation, the 2030 Committee concedes that "available funding will not be adequate to address all of the needs identified," including pavement, bridges, urban and rural mobility, and safety needs.
Yet a report released in 2009 by the House Research Organization, a legislative research agency, indicates TxDOT itself has projected an $86 billion funding gap by 2030. That figure was recalculated again by the state auditor, bringing the new estimate down to $77.4 billion. Even the HRO auditors cautioned against using that figure to make policy or funding decisions, "because it contained costs that should not have been included, a mathematical error, and additional undocumented costs."
The Grant Thornton audit indicates this funding confusion contributes to the underlying mistrust the public and the Legislature holds toward the agency — specifically in its efforts to sustain its current funding levels or justify an increase. "Some stakeholders said that 'TxDOT isn't broken, it's just broke,'" the audit notes.

"Others said that TxDOT isn't sufficiently high-functioning to know if it has the resources required to do the job needed."

The audit offers still another view from skeptics who believe adequate funding is a secondary issue to TxDOT's current internal operations. "If we can't manage effectively the funds provided to us," Saenz acknowledged, "then we cannot expect the trust to use the funds to follow."
Grant Thornton puts some of the blame for the funding confusion on lawmakers' increasing reliance on bond funding for roads. "The only specific question I have is about where it says the Legislature should not have gotten away from pay-as-you-go and done the bonding," said state Rep. Jim Dunnam, D-Waco, a member of the House Transportation Committee. "I want to understand why that is. I'm not defensive about it. I'm willing to accept it. I just don't understand. I thought the logic of borrowing money at today's cost seemed to make sense."
While Dunnam said he's ready to hear what lawmakers might have done wrong, he also believes TxDOT needs to make some "fundamental changes" of its own. "It seems to me that it's the structure of the agency that promotes this lack of transparency," he said. "There are good people at TxDOT, but their organizational structure lends itself to all this."
Not surprisingly, Dunnam, who's also the House Democratic Caucus Chair, points the finger even higher.

"At the end of the day it's an executive agency that's run ultimately by governor's appointees," he said. "But nobody sees it that way. Our governor has always been able to use that Chinese Wall to say, 'Well, I didn't know.'"

Perry spokeswoman Allison Castle said the governor has the ultimate confidence in his appointees, "who requested this review, to look at how best to implement the recommendations."
And Saenz, for his part, believes the agency has the ability to adapt.

"We're making strides … but there are still many more bridges to cross with this," he said. "I'm looking forward to making our agency even better."

That attitude will likely serve him well in front of the Transportation Committee.

"We don't need to beat them up too much," Pickett said. "I'm looking for some action now."

jnformation gathered and originally published by The Texas Tribune, a non-profit news organization based in Austin.
(© MMX, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved.)

Diversions continue cheating and misinforming taxpayers

2010-05-13T08:20:00.007-06:00

By Faith Chatham - DFWRC - May 13, 2010
DFWRCC consistently opposes diversions from dedicated funds and refusal of the Legislature to appropriate of full amount dedicated to specific sectors of the state budget when there are appropriate needs for such services. Slush funds do not benefit the citizens or the Governor to veto scuh appropriations.

Some examples of costs to the citizens from such diversions include:
- Toll Roads costing citizens more to travel per mile than on non-tolled roads while part of the premises for "justification" of financing by tolls is based on lack of funds. Transportation dollars have been spent on advertising, lobbying, travel for promotion of other departments, and transfers into the General Fund in years when the General Fund showed a surplus (violating the balanced budget laws of the state).

- Lack of funding for services by departments and non-profit organizations participating in the vanity license plate program. Organizations ranging from animal spay and neutering to state parks and children's groups such as the Boy Scouts were hindered in their mission by the refusal of the state to appropriate and release funds to them collected by the state through the vanity license plate program where individuals elected to pay additional dollars to the state in behalf of those departments or non-profit organizations. During the Rick Perry Administration this practice, in our opinion, has misled the public and defrauded citizens of dollars they were led to believe they were contributing to specific purposes. If private citizens conducted business in the same manner, they would be subject to arrest for fraud. The Legislature has acted to end some of these diversions but corrective action does not erase the dishonest actions of the Governor and many in the Legislature.

- The State Park budget has been a political field of misrepresentation, misappropriation and under-appropriation while maintenance and services suffered.

- During a period when the number of oil and gas production sites, storage sites and pipeline construction sites and miles of pipeline to be inspected and enforced by the Railroad Commission and TCEQ increased by 300% the number of inspectors and budget for staffing has consistently been reduced for the past decade. Currently fines and fees paid by the industry to these agencies goes into the General Fund instead of being paid to adequately fund field inspections and air quality and water quality testing/monitoring by these agencies. It is dishonest to show a "surplus" in the General Fund when funds paid for specific purposes are not spent to adequately protect the citizens of Texas.

- Employment Insurance Fund:

Below is a post from Bill White about how Rick Perry diverted payroll taxes into his Texas Enterprise Fund and failed to plan ahead for the Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund. His actions resulted in a massive tax increase on small businesses, the engine of job growth in our state.

Download this white paper, How do payroll taxes and the Texas Enterprise Fund work?, to learn more about payroll taxes, Rick Perry's slush fund, and what can be done about the problem.

Job growth in the private sector, especially in small businesses, is the key to economic recovery. Yet this year Texas nearly doubled the payroll taxes on our businesses. This massive tax increase on Texas jobs was caused in part by the diversion of $161.5 million which Gov. Perry used to subsidize companies he selected and publicized at numerous press conferences.

A sharp increase in payroll taxes hurts job growth.

Employers know better how to manage job growth than a politician does. You can see that from the track record of the Enterprise Fund. Failed subprime lenders Countrywide and Washington Mutual received $35 million. Another $35 million was paid to struggling biotech firm Lexicon Genetics, so it could give mouse stem cells to a non-profit affiliated with Texas A&M. Rick Perry announced this project would create 5,000 new jobs. Instead of adding jobs, Lexicon laid off much of its workforce, and lost more than $500 million.

Before the Perry Administration, all payroll taxes were used to fund the Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund and workforce development activities. The Trust Fund is now empty. More than $52 million was diverted from payroll taxes last year alone, when demands on the Trust Fund were rising. Almost every month, these tax dollars are given to various favored companies, including some associated with Perry's campaign contributors. Meanwhile, Perry will have borrowed more than $2 billion from the federal government to plug its holes, without a plan for paying it back.

Three simple reforms can help avoid further hikes in state payroll taxes, establish public accountability and avoid this type of tax increase during a recession in the future.

Restore diverted funds. The Enterprise Fund should pay into the Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund the full $161.5 million diverted from Texas' payroll taxes. The governor previously vetoed a bipartisan bill to limit these diversions, but there is no excuse for keeping this money in the TEF now that the Unemployment Fund is broke. When these funds are returned to the Trust Fund, all employers will benefit from the reduced tax burden and the employers--not a politician--can decide how best to allocate payroll dollars to strengthen business and expand employment.

Audit the Enterprise Fund. There should be an independent audit of tax dollars used for subsidies. The auditors should report on: (1) whether the Governor conducted sufficient and independent analysis of each application before awarding a subsidy; (2) whether each subsidy recipient fulfilled every promise made; (3) whether these dollars were necessary to accomplish the intended purposes; (4) whether there was any political influence used or lobbyist paid to influence these decisions; and (5) whether the subsidized firms competed with other Texas businesses not receiving a subsidy.

Disclose the plan for repaying borrowed federal stimulus funds. Gov. Perry declined federal grants to strengthen the Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund, but has accepted federal loans under the stimulus legislation. No family or business or governmental entity should borrow money without a plan to repay, but in April the chair of the Texas Workforce Commission did not have a plan in place on how and when to repay these amounts. A repayment plan should be made public immediately.

In prior years Gov. Perry took credit for the beneficial effects of modest decreases in employer payroll taxes. Because of lack of planning during economic growth and the diversion of payroll taxes, payroll taxes have almost doubled for many Texas businesses. Obviously this hurts employment, at a time when the number of Texans unemployed is near a record level. Texas must put all payroll taxes into the Trust Fund to reduce further tax increases, the Legislature must have an independent audit of the use of TEF funds, and taxpayers should not have to wait until after an election to find out how the massive borrowings will be repaid.

Mountain Creek Lake Bridge After Dallas Bomb Squad Detonates Incendiary Device

2010-05-11T20:18:00.004-06:00

By Faith Chatham - DFWRCC - May 12, 2010
NTTA issued the following statement:

DALLAS – The North Texas Tollway Authority (NTTA) has re-opened the Mountain Creek Lake Bridge following this afternoon’s bomb scare in which an incendiary device was found submerged under water about 20-to-25 feet away from the bridge structure by a Dallas Police Department (DPD) dive team conducting training exercises.

The device was detonated by a DPD bomb squad just before 5 p.m. To ensure the safety of motorists and NTTA personnel, the bridge remained closed while DPD inspected the bridge structure and surrounding area. No devices were found near or around the bridge and the bridge was re-opened just before 6 p.m.

The incident remains under investigation by the Dallas Police Department.

Earlier in the afternoon they had issued this media advisory:

DALLAS – The North Texas Tollway Authority’s (NTTA) Mountain Creek Lake Bridge (MCLB), located in Dallas, will remain closed until about 8 p.m. tonight following this afternoon’s bomb scare in which an incendiary device was found submerged under water about 20-to-25 feet away from the bridge structure by a Dallas Police Department (DPD) dive team conducting dive drills.

The device was detonated by a DPD bomb squad just before 5 p.m. To ensure the safety of motorists and NTTA personnel, the bridge will remain closed while DPD inspects the bridge structure and surrounding area. The bridge will re-open once it has been determined safe to do so.

DFW Household transportation cost

2010-04-16T07:45:00.001-06:00

TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS FOR TEXAS NEWS

Search • RSS Feed

For Immediate Release:
2010-03-17

For More Information:
Melissa Cubria
512-479-7287

March 17th Marks “Transportation Freedom Day” for Dallas -Ft. Worth

On March 17th, Dallas residents celebrate Transportation Freedom Day, the date a typical area household has earned enough to cover its annual transportation costs.

“Transportation Freedom Day is an eye opener,” said Representative Rafael Anchia (D-Dallas). “It shows the need for greater investments in more efficient ways to get around, such as public transit. When government makes the right kind of transportation investments, citizens save a lot of money.”

Americans on average spend an astounding 17 percent of their annual income on transportation, far more than they pay for food, clothing, entertainment, income taxes or even health care. New findings released by the Texas Public Interest Research Group (TexPIRG) show that a typical Dallas-Ft.Worth household shells out the equivalent of 21 percent income to pay for transportation, or 76 days to pay for annual transportation costs.

In more walkable communities with better transit systems households spend less. In the Oak Lawn neighborhood between Cole and Lemon station, for instance, residents spend less of their income on transportation than other surrounding places. A typical area household could expect to spend 13 percent of their income on transportation if they lived there, the equivalent of about 4 fewer weeks of income to get around.

“People may not recognize how much they pay for transportation. Our research and these numbers show that we need long-term solutions that make it easier for Texans to drive less and to get around more efficiently,” said Melissa Cubria of TexPIRG.

Here in Dallas-Ft.Worth, Transportation Freedom Days in the region ranged from February 17th in Oak Lawn Neighborhood around Cole and Lemon Station (i.e., 13% of income), compared to April 4th in Aubrey (i.e. 25.5% of income). Averaged across the region as a whole, Transportation Freedom Day lands on March 17th.

The average American household spent more than $8,000 per year on its vehicles in 2008 according to the U.S. Department of Transportation. Americans who live in areas with good access to public transit generally spend less on transportation than those who are fully dependent on cars. Residents in transit-friendly areas tend to attain “Transportation Freedom” earlier in the year. By highlighting these dates, TexPIRG seeks to raise awareness about how access to public transportation is a crucial for saving Americans money.

“Shortchanging public transportation is a classic case of being pennywise and pound foolish,” added Cubria. “Now more than ever, public officials must make trains and buses a top priority.”

Transportation Freedom Day is the day of the year in which a median-income household has earned enough money to pay for their transportation expenditures for the year. It is based on Census data includes gas, repairs, parking, vehicle depreciation and transit fares.

The findings illustrated in Transportation Freedom Day confirm other data showing that an individual commuter switching from driving from the suburbs to using public transportation in 2010 could expect to save $8,756 in 2010, according to the American Public Transit Association.

Transportation Freedom Day data comes from the Center for Neighborhood Technology in Chicago, which is a leader in statistically based analysis of transportation and housing. Transportation costs are controlled for differences of income, family size, and number of working individuals in a household. Transportation demand is modeled using the most recent census data, and costs are calculated to include car ownership, maintenance, gas, and transit fares. A detailed description of their transportation cost methodology can be found at: http://htaindex.cnt.org/model_summary.

Arlington considers tigher rules for gas-drilling

2010-04-14T11:25:00.003-06:00

BY ROBERT CADWALLADER - Special to the Star-Telegram - April 13, 2010

ARLINGTON -- With natural-gas drilling on the rise, the Planning and Zoning Commission will look at higher road-damage fees, tighter time limits and other measures to buffer the industry's impact on the city.

The commission meets in a 4 p.m. work session today at City Hall, 101 W. Abram St., to consider what would be the third major revision of the 2003 gas well ordinance.

The commission plans to vote next week on final recommendations to the City Council.

"This is one of the main drilling hubs in the Barnett Shale," Mayor Robert Cluck said.

"There is more urban drilling now. We're closer to structures -- homes, churches -- than we ever have been."

The city has received 210 permit applications since 2006, when its first seven wells were drilled. The city so far has approved permits for 163 wells, of which about 130 have been drilled, said Darren Groth, Arlington's gas well inspector. The increase in drilling points to the need for further strengthening of the ordinance, he said.

Suggested changes include:

Charging more to cover most costs for road damage caused by heavy trucks of drilling and pipeline companies. The city used to charge about $200 per well but has gradually increased that to $480. That's still far short of the minimum $5,000 charged by the city of Mansfield, Groth said.

Limiting the time that companies can drill at a site after receiving a specific-use permit. Currently, they have up to one year to drill the first well but no limits on drilling subsequent wells.

Notifying more people when gas-drilling companies apply for permits. For a specific-use permit, the city mails notices to people living within 200 feet of the site. But in the next stage -- the drilling permit application, in which remaining details are addressed before the council -- notices are mailed to residents within 600 feet.

That means a lot more people are hearing about the project after the drilling basically has been approved. However, Cluck said that's not too late to voice concerns to the council, which can deny a drilling permit even if it meets city requirements.

In written statements to city staff, several energy companies voiced concerns about some recommendations. For example, they said limiting the time for drilling subsequent wells on the same site -- an effort to speed up drilling -- could have the opposite effect if a company misses a deadline and has to go back through the permitting process.

Councilwoman Sheri Capehart said she got an earful of gas-drilling concerns at a town hall meeting she hosted last week.

Many residents said the city needs to do more to monitor compliance with landscaping, trucking hours, noise limits and other stipulations in drilling permits. They noted that the city has only one gas well inspector.

Others suggested increasing the percentage of property owners who must sign waivers before a company can drill within 600 feet of residences. They also want fines for well-related violations raised beyond the standard $2,000 for most ordinance infractions.

"I just want us to do this right," Capehart said. "I'm not anti-gas wells, because I think a lot of people benefit. But I want us to do it appropriately and with a vision of what this means to our future."

Despite Legal Assaults Roy LaVerne Brooks stays on ballot in Tarrant County

2010-02-25T13:37:00.004-06:00

By Faith Chatham - Feb. 25, 2010
Former Texas State Democratic Vice Chair Roy LaVerne Brooks wins second round of strategic legal assault by financier Dick Abrams. Unable to get County Chair Steve Maxwell to remove Ms. Brooks from the Tarrant County Democratic Primary Ballot so that he could run unopposed for Justice of the Peace, Pct. 6, Democratic donor and bundler, Dick Abrams brought suit in District Court. Abrams' suit against Roy LaVerne Brooks and Tarrant County Democratic Chair Steve Maxwell was dismissed with prejudice Friday. (aka - don't refile this case)

The contrast between the two candidates is stark. Abrams, former C.E.O. / C.O.B. of failed Surety Bank and Surety Holding, engendered support of Democratic incumbents and some Democratic "want-a-be's" by writing substantial checks to most incumbents and Democratic Clubs, creating a buzz about him being a "viable candidate." Simple Google searches bring up numerous Federal S.E.C. and Comptroller of the Currency documents chronicling Abrams less than stellar performance at the helm of Surety Bank and its holding company. Those touting how "viable" avoid mentioning that Abrams was barred from banking for failure to comply with Federal Banking laws! He settled with the Comptroller of the Currency by agreeing not to participate in any capacity in any federal funded housing, federal loans, banks, or savings and loans because of fiduciary irregularities, misrepresentation of fact on Federal Reports, and failure to follow Federal Law, and the use of bank premises for “for profit endeavors by board members and members of the family of board members.” However, because he can write max allowable checks to high profile candidates some think that he deserved to be the nominee.

In contrast, a Google search on Roy LaVerne Brooks profiles a Democratic Party activist, community servant and civic leader who was named the "Outstanding Woman Citizen of Fort Worth" and inducted into the "Texas Hall of Fame" for 30 years of civic leadership and consistent service to her hometown and the State of Texas. Brooks, a graduate of Prairie View A&M, with M.A. in Divinity from Southwestern, has chaired the handicap transportation authority (MI.T.S.A.C) in Fort Worth and served as Vice-Chair of the Fort Worth "T". Conservative with her finances, Ms. Brooks does not have as deep pockets as her opponent. The contrast between a social workers' salary and the check-writing resources of her opponent are substantial.
Abrams' lawsuit drained much of Brooks "Get out the Vote" resources. None of the newspapers or television stations are mentioning that Texas or Federal Law does not prohibit individuals who are barred from banking for violations of Federal Law from running for (and possibly winning) judicial seats in Texas, or election as State Representatives and State Senators.

Contributions to the Brooks Campaign can be made on-line at WWW.BROOKSFORJP6.ORG. $35.00 can reach half of the registered voters in the precinct by robocall. The primary is March 2nd. Act now if you want to support a qualified woman candidate for public office. The Court ruled that the people have the right to decide who their nominee should be. Money will determine whether the voters get to learn about the differences in the two candidates.

I am not pretending to be unbiased. I know Roy LaVerne Brooks and admire and respect her for her lifetime of service, incredible leadership skills, and understanding of the challenges facing individuals who come before the bench in that Justice of the Peace Precinct. If Mr. Abrams had chosen to campaign to win rather than to use the courts to remove his opponent, this race would probably have avoided my radar. As I examined the court documents, signatures on the petitions, candidate’s credentials, and the needs of the precinct, sharp contrast between the candidates convinced me that Roy LaVerne Brooks is the candidate who can truly best serve the people as Justice of the Peace. The way to build the party is to bring honor to it by fielding and electing people whose life reflects consistent integrity, service and honor. Roy LaVerne Brooks is a woman of integrity, and possesses a heart for the people and the intellect and discernment to do the job.

Does the gas industry threaten your health?

2009-10-07T17:31:00.000-06:00

Does the gas industry threaten your health?

Find out at the DISH, TX public meeting: 10/12 at 7pm

Public can discuss new study showing toxic air threats from gas compressor stations

Dear Sharon,

Come to DISH, TX
On Monday, October 12th at 7pm the Town of DISH will hold a public meeting to discuss the findings of recent air quality study commissioned by the Town.

Please attend and spread the word to your friends and neighbors. We need you to show your support for local government and citizens addressing toxic emissions in their community!

Town of DISH public meeting
October 12th at 7 pm
5413 Tim Donald Road
DISH, Texas 76247

Learn about the health risks of gas facilities in your community
The results of DISH's air study revealed high concentrations of carcinogenic and neurotoxin compounds near and on residential properties near the megaplex of compressors stations operating at the corner of Tim Donald and Strader Roads in DISH.

These compressors have multiple engines and support equipment, such as condensate tanks, that emit fugitive toxic emissions. The report also indicated that many of the compounds in the air exceeded the Short-term and Long-term Effects Screening Levels according to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality regulations.

We need your help to support science, public health
Public health and safety may be best served by immediately shutting down these compressors until they can be operated safely with emission controls. However, The Town of DISH is taking tremendous heat from the oil and gas industry, who like Big Tobacco and other industries, are simply belittling valid concerns and studies as "bad science."

We need you to turn out to this meeting and support the efforts of local government and citizens to gather emissions data and hold companies accountable for health impacts!

Thanks,
Jennifer Goldman, EARTHWORKS' Oil & Gas Accountability Project

For More Information:

Read the study
Read an EARTHWORKS analysis of the study
Fill out the Town of DISH's health survey form

You received this message because you are a member
of the EARTHWORKS/Oil & Gas Accountability Project e-action list.

Donate to OGAP/EARTHWORKS | Visit your member page | Remove yourself

Food Stamp Plight Highlights Perry’s Failure To Lead, Gilbert Says

2009-10-06T23:45:00.003-06:00

Food Stamp Plight Highlights Perry’s Failure To Lead, Gilbert Says

Posted using ShareThis

Food Stamp Plight Highlights Perry’s Failure To Lead, Gilbert Says

2009-10-06T23:45:00.001-06:00

Food Stamp Plight Highlights Perry’s Failure To Lead, Gilbert Says

Posted using ShareThis

Co-Founder of T.U.R.F. declares candidacy for Governor

2009-09-17T10:33:00.001-06:00

Hank Gilbert interview:

Taxpayers get shafted in toll deal with Spanish company

2009-09-11T08:32:00.006-06:00

By Terri Hall - San Antonio Transportation Policy Examiner - September 10, 2009
Is there ANY elected official looking out for the taxpayers anymore? So much for taxpayer protections and oversight from Texas Attorney General, Greg Abbott. Even after Abbott held-up several controversial comprehensive development agreements (CDAs, also known as public private partnerships, PPPs) for months declaring them unconstitutional, he recently gave final approval to allow a contract with Spanish toll operator, Cintra, to takeover parts of the LBJ freeway, I-635, in Dallas. The deal will use Dallas Police and Fire Pension System and will charge 75 cents PER MILE to use toll lanes, and even worse, a half a billion in gas taxes will subsidize the deal with Cintra, in a massive DOUBLE TAX scheme.

It's the hefty amount of public money in the deal that caused Abbott to deem it unconstitutional - to have one Legislature bind a future Legislature with its obligations. Wasn't this a major objection to the Wall Street bailouts? Privatizing profits and socializing losses?

Governor Rick Perry, who has grown fond of criticizing Washington, has taken a page out of their playbook and applied it to Texas toll roads. There's a reason these deals are called public private partnerships. The private operators come in and milk the taxpayers by exploiting the government powers of eminent domain and raiding public money to subsidize toll roads that aren't viable otherwise, and they walk away with the profits for a half-century at a time.

CDAs are sweetheart deals that guarantee congestion on free routes through the use of non-compete agreements (which prohibit expanding or building free routes without paying penalties), guarantee 12-19% annual profits, lower the speed limits on surrounding free routes (to drive more traffic to the toll road), and cash-in on taxpayer-backed low interest loans.

The authorization to enter into CDAs expired last week. The grassroots saw to it that such deals were squashed in Perry's special session that attempted re-authorize the contracts that sunset August 31. Many lawmakers took offensive to being called back to Austin for to extend sweetheart deals for private industry.

However, Perry and some sold-out legislators made certain that about a dozen CDAs were excepted out of a moratorium passed in 2007 to allow many CDAs to move forward until 2011, including the LBJ project, I-820 in Tarrant County, Loop 9 in North Texas, the Grand Parkway in Houston area, and both Trans Texas Corridor contracts among others.

As the details of these remaining CDAs are made public, the taxpayers must remain vigilant to require the Attorney General to do his job and protect taxpayers from billions in risky leveraged debt that prices 90% of motorists off our public freeways. The race for the next Governor, Attorney General, and state legislature must keep these CDAs and toll road policies front and center. In every public forum, ask each and every candidate his/her stand on privatized toll roads, the Trans Texas Corridor, and how he/she plans to address transportation funding in the next session.
Read more on San Antonio Policy Examiner

Southwest Parkway Funding

2009-08-29T09:24:00.005-06:00

By Faith Chatham - DFWRCC - August 29, 2009
Funding of Southwest Parkway is still an issues in Texas. Planning for the freeway began in the 1960ies. By the 1990ies it was fully funded. Construction was delayed as some state and county "leaders" "identified it as a good candidate for tolling." As some in Austin began to dream of "creating revenue streams" from some of our public tax-payer financed infrastructure, the citizens of Fort Worth got shafted. A necessary freeway to serve that section of Tarrant county was planned, funded, affordable as a non-toll state highway. With George Bush and Rick Perry in charge, construction was delayed. Local leaders were shown that the only way to get necessary maintenance and expansion of state highways was as private public partnership toll roads. Road maintenance was delayed. Designated highway funds were transferred to other uses in the state budget. Dedicated funds in highway accounts were kept in the state treasury and not appropriated, showing false surpluses while roads all over Texas deteriorated. A crisis in road construction, congestion and air quality was created by planners and elected officials who were "sold on the advantages" of private investments in toll projects. The state and federal highway administration literally turned off the faucet on funding for road and highway and bridge projects to convince local leaders and citizens that there was a crisis in infrastructure maintenance and construction.

Now in 2009 funding of the Southwest Freeway is still being discussed (er red-stamped). Citizens in Fort Worth who paid for the right-of-way with tax money, who paid for the planning with tax money, who paid with their homes, land and businesses and suffered the strain of relocation, will have opportunity to use the Southwest Freeway...that is when they pay a toll.

Yes, it is good that it is nearing completion. It is a crime that those entrusted with the public good chose to rip off the residents of Fort Worth by delaying construction on a fully-funded non-tolled highway because it was "a good candidate for tolling!"

Toll Projects (continued from Minutes of Texas Transportation Commission, Aug. 27, 2009)
b. Tarrant County – Consider the approval of funds to pay certain construction and
right-of-way costs related to the crossing of the Southwest Parkway, a toll project
from I-30 to Altamesa Boulevard in the City of Fort Worth, over the Union Pacific
Railroad’s Davidson Rail Yard in Tarrant County, and to pay a portion of the costs
of a traffic and revenue study prepared for the Southwest Parkway (MO)
By Minute Order 111557 dated October 30, 2008, the commission approved a term sheet authorizing NTTA to develop the Southwest Parkway, subject to NTTA establishing its feasibility. By Minute Order 111889 dated July 30, 2009, the commission approved NTTA’s application for a toll equity grant of $49.87 million to be used to pay for a portion of the right of way and other costs to obtain access to the Davidson Rail Yard. The current order concerns three matters. The first is approval of $45.13 million to be used to pay the balance of the right of way and other costs to obtain access to the Davidson Rail Yard. The payment would be made if NTTA elects not to develop the Southwest Parkway. The second is approval of an amount not to exceed $40 million for the initial construction phase (as provided for in the Formal Agreement of January 2009 with the Union Pacific Railroad) of bridges crossing the Davidson Rail Yard, construction of retaining walls and other structures. The payment would be made provided the department develops the Southwest Parkway. The third is directing the executive director to enter into an agreement with NTTA under which the parties share equally in the costs of the preparation of a traffic and revenue study for Southwest Parkway.

Where to find public notices of Trans Texas Corridor

2009-08-29T09:10:00.004-06:00

If you have been looking for public notices regarding the Trans Texas Corridor in the Texas Register as was prescribed by State Law, you probably had a hard time finding them. Those notices, under the Perry Administration, were sometimes posted on the Secretary of State's website. Now the law has been changed to comply with practice since practice did not comply with the law.

From the Minutes of the Texas Transportation Commission, August 27, 2009
Chapter 1 – Management and Chapter 24 – Trans-Texas Corridor (MO)
Amendments to §1.82, Statutory Advisory Committee Operations and
Procedures, §1.84, Statutory Advisory Committees, and §1.85, DepartmentAdvisory Committees (Advisory Committees); and Amendments to §24.13, Corridor Planning and Development (Development of Facilities) The Secretary of State currently publishes open meeting notices on the Secretary's website rather than in the Texas Register. The amendments conform the rules to the Secretary's practice. Due to recent legislation, the amendments also change the composition and selection of the public transportation advisory committee. Finally, the amendments change the rules governing advisory committees to extend committee sunset dates for committees under Chapter 1 and to provide for committee sunset dates for corridor segment committees under Chapter 24.

Despite dire warnings Texas remains attractive to investors

2009-08-29T08:22:00.004-06:00

By Faith Chatham - DFW RCC - August 29, 2009
Repeatedly we heard elected officials warn us that refusal to accept Cintra's bid of SH121 would scare off other investors and cripple the Texas economy. This week's report from the Comptroller of Public Accounts shows that Texas, despite the recession, fires and other natural (and unnatural) disasters, remains attractive to investors.

Combs Says Short-Term Note Sale Is Best In Texas History

(AUSTIN) — Texas Comptroller Susan Combs announced that Texas’ highly anticipated sale of $5.5 billion in Tax and Revenue Anticipation Notes (TRANs) achieved an interest rate of 0.48 percent — the lowest rate the state has ever received on its annual sale of short-term notes.

“We had an impressive sale and an excellent interest rate — the best Texas has ever had,” Combs said. “Buyers bid more than $28 billion to obtain a portion of the $5.5 billion in notes Texas offered for sale Tuesday. That is more than five times the amount available for purchase. The high demand for Texas’ high-quality notes drove the interest rate down to its historic low.”

Texas will use the proceeds of the TRAN sale to distribute state funding to public schools early in the upcoming fiscal year and manage its cash flow between the start of the fiscal year and the arrival of tax revenues later in the year.

“The bond rating firms gave our TRANs the highest possible ratings,” Combs said. “The sale shows the financial community’s utmost confidence that Texas is a great investment, and our state government continues to be fiscally responsible by spending taxpayer dollars wisely.”

The TRAN notes sold Tuesday will be repaid Aug. 31, 2010.
By Allen Spelce or R.J. DeSilva - Office of the Comptroller of Public Accounts

Ted Houghton says I-69 does not connect with Mexico!

2009-08-27T09:56:00.004-06:00

By Faith Chatham - DFWRCC - Aug. 27, 2009
I'm posting this UTube clip of Texas Transportation Commissioner Ted Houghton stating that I-69 does not connect to Mexico. I had missed seeing this until this morning. It illustrates how dishonest TxDot and the Texas Transportation Commission has been in the entire process since Gov. Rick Perry and GWB decided to push through the Trans Texas Corridor and private public partnership CD model for highway/public infrastructure construction and operation.

State lawmakers diverting funds from dedicated accounts to general fund

2009-08-05T15:31:00.003-06:00

By Peggy Fikac - Houston Chronicle Austin Bureau - Sunday, August 2, 2009
Dedicated funds diverted to state budget

The billions in levies originally were collected for specific programs

AUSTIN — Nearly $3.7 billion in levies collected for everything from fighting air pollution to helping low-income people with their electric bills to funding trauma care will instead help balance the state's upcoming two-year budget.

The money, for the most part, is collected through fees and fines that legally are dedicated for a particular purpose. If lawmakers do not spend the money on the dedicated purposes, however, the balances become available to spend on other programs.

“It's kind of like having your (household) budget laid out and spending part of your food money on entertainment, or vice versa,” said Dale Craymer, chief economist of the Texas Taxpayers and Research Association, who has worked for a state comptroller, two governors and as the Texas House fiscal analyst. “It's a backdoor way to undedicate the money.”

In some cases, unspent balances in dedicated accounts have grown to hundreds of millions of dollars over years.

For example, the System Benefit Fund has accrued more than $670 million. The program imposes a fee on electricity customers in competitive retail markets, including Houston, Dallas-Fort Worth and most of the Rio Grande Valley, to provide a May-September discount for low-income customers.

Other unspent balances include $331.3 million in the account that reimburses hospitals for uncompensated trauma care. The account is financed by extra fines on drivers for driving while intoxicated and other offenses. A total of $150 million will be allocated during the next two years from the fund, despite hospitals reporting about $225 million in uncompensated trauma care in fiscal 2009 alone.

“I would say it's very important to us that we get that funding, considering the post-hurricane period,” said Jim Parisi, Memorial Hermann's chief business development officer for the southwest market. “If you look at the increased demand for trauma at our Level 1 trauma center, our volumes are dramatically higher. From my perspective, the more money that the Legislature puts into the system, the more likely we'll have more hospitals participating in trauma care.”

An even larger $515.3 million balance will be held in the Texas Emissions Reduction Plan account after $271.7 million is spent on the program in the next two years.

The program, financed in part with a vehicle title fee, funds grants in targeted counties, including Harris and Bexar, to address polluting heavy vehicles and equipment. In the current two-year budget, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality did not have the money to fund about 570 applications asking for $40 million for emissions reductions.

“We're generating funds for a good purpose. We're diverting the funds, without telling people, for general purposes. And then we say we're not taxing. Well, government is lying,” said Rep. Sylvester Turner, D-Houston, who called such levies amount to “a tax by misrepresentation.”

Criticism and defense

When it comes to the System Benefit Fund for low-income electric customers, the state will spend $258.9 million during the next two years, according to the state comptroller. It will be an increase from current spending, but Turner said it will be far from enough.

“It's just a sinister way of keeping money intended for the poor in the budget to certify the budget. It is a tax on the poor. And we are doing it because these are individuals that can't afford lobbyists and consultants,” Turner said.

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Steve Ogden, R-Bryan, said he understands the argument, but “if you are going to criticize that, then go tell me what other parts of the budget I'm supposed to cut. … The choice to complain about it is just hot air.”

Alternatives, he said, would be raising general taxes or dipping into the state savings account known as the rainy day fund, which budget-writers expect to need in the future.

“The long and short of it is, we have to do this in order to balance the budget,” Ogden said. “I guess this was the least objectionable of the four alternatives.”

The situation points up a major public policy issue, he said.

“Our tax and revenue system is pretty messed up, and a case can certainly be made for a major overhaul of our tax structure,” Ogden said.

Apart from the general revenue funds, lawmakers did make headway on reducing diversions from a separate account, the gasoline-tax-fueled highway fund — although $1.2 billion still will be diverted from road building.

Progress on the highway fund was among pluses cited by a spokeswoman for Gov. Rick Perry, who signed the budget into law and has spoken for spending dedicated fees for their intended purpose or eliminating them.

Rep. Warren Chisum, R-Pampa, former House Appropriations Committee chairman, described the unspent accounts as “kind of a safety net” to ensure the state comptroller can certify the budget as balanced.

“I think it's fiscally responsible. … It's not always prudent to spend all your money just because you collected it,” Chisum said. “It is a shell game, but you know, life's a shell game. We just can't deficit spend.”
Read more in the Houston Chronicle

MACQUARIE Infrastructure Group considers selling US assets

2009-07-15T14:13:00.002-06:00

By Iain McDonald - The Australian - July 09, 2009

MIG to help holders of its securities

MACQUARIE Infrastructure Group is considering ways to help security holders, amid speculation of radical changes for the toll road owner as it grapples with high debt and some poorly performing assets.

"In response to a request from the ASX regarding market speculation, MIG advises that it is reviewing options which seek to enhance security-holder value," it said.

"The decision has been made by the MIG boards in respect of any of these options."

MIG had said previously that it was considering asset sales to boost shareholder value so the fund's use of the word "options" indicated it was considering other measures.

Analysts have speculated recently on a broad range of options for MIG, including a capital raising.

One close source said the choices being considered by the fund were not as broad as those flagged by analysts.

According to MIG, it would update the market no later than its full-year results briefing on August 20. The fund's securities closed down 6.3 per cent, or 9c, at $1.26 yesterday.

In the latest research note, Merrill Lynch analysts say MIG's gearing is too high and Australian fund managers view the listed fund as below investment grade.

They say the ratio of net debt to earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation needs to fall from 14.4 to about nine, and to get there MIG could give away its US assets, sell its remaining 25 per cent stake in Sydney's Westlink toll road and carry out a discounted rights issue to raise between $1.6billion and $2bn.

"We can't see a solution that doesn't involve a recapitalisation via some form of capital raising," Merrill Lynch's Matthew Spence, David Porter and Simon Chan say.

The overhaul suggestions are the latest in a string of proposals and speculation among analysts, traders and local media about the outlook for MIG, one of Macquarie Group's listed funds.

UBS analysts said in May that MIG's US assets, including the Chicago Skyway, Indiana Toll road and Dulles Greenway, could be sold for a nominal amount to remove fear among investors that the fund might have to pump additional equity into the US assets.

The problem with the US assets is that the debt taken on to buy the roads was too high, given the performance of the assets since they were purchased, according to Merrill Lynch. "Given this dismal view of the US portfolio is largely held across the market, in order for MIG to re-rate, we believe they need to get rid of the US assets," the Merrill Lynch analysts said. "We don't think it matters who takes them, given the nominal equity value."

In June, Macquarie Infrastructure changed its distribution policy so that future distributions will be based on cash flow. Previously, surplus funds were used to supplement cash flow when paying distributions.

It paid distributions of 10c per stapled security in the first and second half of last fiscal year but Merrill Lynch expects distribution of just 4c this fiscal year, which started July 1.

Macquarie Infrastructure first said it would look at selling other assets when it announced the sale of its interest in Westlink last December.
Read more in the Australian

Cities Lose Out on Road Funds From Federal Stimulus

2009-07-08T23:39:00.003-06:00

By MICHAEL COOPER and GRIFF PALMER - The New York Times - July 8, 2009
Two-thirds of the country lives in large metropolitan areas, home to the nation’s worst traffic jams and some of its oldest roads and bridges. But cities and their surrounding regions are getting far less than two-thirds of federal transportation stimulus money.

According to an analysis by The New York Times of 5,274 transportation projects approved so far — the most complete look yet at how states plan to spend their stimulus money — the 100 largest metropolitan areas are getting less than half the money from the biggest pot of transportation stimulus money. In many cases, they have lost a tug of war with state lawmakers that urban advocates say could hurt the nation’s economic engines.

The stimulus law provided $26.6 billion for highways, bridges and other transportation projects, but left the decision on how to spend most of it to the states, which have a long history of giving short shrift to major metropolitan areas when it comes to dividing federal transportation money. Now that all 50 states have beat a June 30 deadline by winning approval for projects that will use more than half of that transportation money, worth $16.4 billion, it is clear that the stimulus program will continue that pattern of spending disproportionately on rural areas.

“If we’re trying to recover the nation’s economy, we should be focusing where the economy is, which is in these large areas,” said Robert Puentes, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution’s Metropolitan Policy Program, which advocates more targeted spending. “But states take this peanut-butter approach, taking the dollars and spreading them around very thinly, rather than taking the dollars and concentrating them where the most complex transportation problems are.”

The 100 largest metropolitan areas also contribute three-quarters of the nation’s economic activity, and one consequence of that is monumental traffic jams. A study of congestion in urban areas released Wednesday by the Texas Transportation Institute found that traffic jams in 2007 cost urban Americans 2.8 billion gallons of wasted gas and 4.2 billion hours of lost time.

The Times analysis shows that a little more than half of the stimulus money will be spent on “pavement improvement” projects, mostly repaving rutted and potholed roads. Nearly one-tenth of it will be spent to fix or replace bridges. More than a quarter of the money will be spent to widen roads or build new roads or bridges.

But the projects also offered vivid evidence that metropolitan areas are losing the struggle for stimulus money. Seattle found itself shut out when lawmakers in the State of Washington divided the first pot of stimulus money. Missouri has directed nearly half its money to 89 small counties which, together, make up only a quarter of the state’s population. The United States Conference of Mayors, which did its own analysis of different data last month, concluded that the nation’s metropolitan areas were being “shortchanged.”

Pat McCrory, the mayor of Charlotte, N.C., said his city “did pretty terrible” when it came to getting money. Of the $423 million in projects approved so far in North Carolina, only $7.8 million is going to Mecklenburg County, the state’s most populous county and the home of Charlotte.

Cleveland was initially promised $200 million of Ohio’s stimulus money to help build a five-lane bridge to replace the 50-year-old Innerbelt Bridge, which is so deteriorated that officials banned heavy truck traffic on it last fall. But state officials, worried about meeting federal deadlines, took back $115 million in stimulus money and decided to use it on shovel-ready projects elsewhere.

The state promised to find another source of money for the bridge project, but now Ohio’s largest stimulus project is the $150 million it is spending to build the Nelsonville Bypass in southeastern Ohio, which officials say will alleviate a bottleneck and improve transportation to Appalachia.

Transportation experts said the stimulus was drawing attention to a longstanding trend.

“We have a long history of shortchanging cities and metropolitan areas and allocating transportation money to places where few people live,” said Owen D. Gutfreund, an assistant professor of urban planning at the City University of New York who wrote “20th Century Sprawl: Highways and the Reshaping of the American Landscape” (Oxford University Press, 2004).

Professor Gutfreund said that in some states the distribution was driven by statehouse politics, with money spread to the districts of as many lawmakers as possible, or given out as political favors. In others, he said, the money is distributed by formulas that favor rural areas or that give priority to state-owned roads, often found far outside of urban areas.

Mayors had lobbied Congress to send the money directly to cities, but in the end, 70 percent of the money was sent to the states to be divided, and 30 percent was sent to metropolitan planning organizations, which represent the local governments in many metropolitan areas.

Those organizations were not bound by the June 30 deadline for getting their projects approved, so metropolitan areas could eventually see their share of the transportation money go up. Other pots of money in the transportation bill stand to benefit metropolitan areas more, including the $8.4 billion for mass transit and the $1.5 billion that the federal Department of Transportation can award to projects of national or regional importance.

Some cities have been delayed in winning approval for their projects. New York City is expecting $261 million of the highway stimulus money. It had hoped to start work in May on its biggest project, a $175 million rehabilitation of the St. George Ferry Terminal in Staten Island, but the project has yet to win approval.

Transportation is currently a hot topic in Washington, where Congress plans to pass a new six-year transportation law within the next year and a half. Washington’s difficulty in directing its transportation aid has led to calls for a national infrastructure bank, which would rank projects and help them get financed.

Obama administration officials, who have called for ending sprawl and making sure that federal transportation spending is cost-effective, say they are looking at how states are spending the money from the stimulus law, officially called the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, to learn about the strengths and weaknesses of the current system.

“The transparency that comes with Recovery Act funds is letting us see what’s happening in real time, and that’s a good thing,” said Roy Kienitz, an under secretary of transportation for policy. “Understanding where recovery dollars go and why will help us determine how to shape long-term transportation policies with the goal of getting the most benefit for every dollar.”

Toll road item may threaten session - Contract protections sought if private leases to remain legal.

2009-06-30T10:47:00.002-06:00

By Ben Wear - AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF - Tuesday, June 30, 2009

The spoiler of Gov. Rick Perry's midsummer's dream of a three-day special session could be the "Nichols language."
The consensus seems to be that few problems exist with the first two items on Perry's session "call" — essentially the allowable agenda for the session — that would extend the life of five state agencies, including the Texas Department of Transportation, and allow TxDOT to issue $2 billion in debt.
But there could be trouble with the third and last item, legislation granting a reprieve to a statutory death sentence for private toll road leases.
During the regular session, state Sen. John Carona, R-Dallas, carried a bill that would have extended by six years the legal authority for TxDOT and regional mobility authorities to sign what have usually been 50-year contracts with private companies to build and operate (and profit from) tollways on public land. Authority for such leases expires Sept. 1.
The general understanding was that the legislation's final passage was dependent on approval of a separate bill by state Sen. Robert Nichols, R-Jacksonville, that would put limits on such contracts. Both bills passed the House and Senate, either with their original bill numbers or as part of the main TxDOT bill that died late in the session.

The question is, will that linkage still be the case in the special session? Nichols said Monday that it had better be, or the toll road item could end up in the ditch.
"I feel very strongly about it, and so do many" other senators, Nichols said.
Carona said Monday that he could see eliminating at least some of what Nichols had in mind if a toll road lease extension were passed that applied to only a handful of projects for which officials have already decided who — TxDOT or local toll authorities — will be in charge of the projects. That list reportedly includes extending the Texas 130 tollway north from Georgetown to Hillsboro, building the new Interstate 69 from south of Refugio to the Rio Grande Valley and adding toll lanes in the Dallas-Fort Worth area.

However, even in those cases, Carona said, "you'd have to have at least put some protections in there."

That would potentially include limiting so-called noncompete clauses in private tollway leases and requiring that the contracts specify what government would pay if it wanted to prematurely end a lease and take over a road. Nichols' Senate Bill 17, among other things, said that noncompete clauses would apply only in a four-mile strip along either side of a toll road built under such a lease.

Noncompete clauses, a common feature in toll road agreements, typically say the government cannot build a free road nearby that would lower usage of the tollway and thus its revenue. Or, if such an adjacent free road were built, then the toll road operator would be entitled to compensation.

So, what would Perry do if something close to SB 17 were attached to the extension legislation in the special session? Some officials said that such an amendment could be determined to be outside the scope of Perry's call. Nichols disagrees with that.
Perry spokeswoman Katherine Cesinger said Perry's staff is talking with Nichols' office to discuss his concerns.

Carona said, "One source in the governor's office indicated that any bill that contained the Nichols language would be vetoed. Another said that's not necessarily so."
Read more in the

Austin American-Statesman

Perry vetoes bill to prohibit TxDOT’s ad campaigns to sway public opinion in favor of tolling

2009-06-23T11:17:00.002-06:00

Citizen lawsuit to stop TxDOT’s taxpayer-funded lobbying to continue

By Terri Hall -TURF.– June 23, 2009

Austin, TX - Governor Rick Perry vetoed HB 2142 (authored by Rep.Ruth McClendon), which could have settled the issue of the Texas Department of Transportation's (TxDOT) misuse of taxpayer money to attempt to sway public opinion in favor of toll roads, particularly privatized toll roads, and the Trans Texas Corridor.

“Governor Perry prefers to pour salt in the wound instead of allow meaningful reform of his highway department that’s run amok and lost the trust of many Texans. The wholesale outrage over TxDOT’s propaganda campaign from taxpayers and lawmakers alike prompted the Legislature to act, and, as is his usual course of action, Perry instead chooses to stick his thumb in Texans’ eyes rather than protect citizens from the abuses of taxpayer-funded lobbying,” concluded Texas TURF Founder Terri Hall.

"Losers" still get paid

To further demonstrate the Governor's (and Legislature's) total disregard for fiscal responsibility when it comes to toll roads, he also signed SB 882 (authored by Sen. John Carona) that EXPANDS payments to LOSING bidders by Regional Mobility Authorities (RMAs) to design-build contracts and allows those payments to exceed $250,000 (which was the cap placed on payments to losing bidders on Comprehensive Developments Agreements in 2007)!

"The mantra in Austin is 'the sky is falling, we have no money for roads,' yet we have money to pay LOSING BIDDERS who won't even build any roads? Wouldn't every other industry that bids on government contracts love this goodie? They didn't pass a bill to continue TxDOT or the Department of Insurance, but they were sure to pass this one," Hall noted.

SB 882 also repeals the prohibitions on Board members and RMA Directors from receiving gifts and contributions, which clearly takes a step backwards and allows conflicts of interest to abound.

Keep Texas Moving dubbed propaganda campaign

Lawmakers studied TxDOT's ad campaign in-depth in the interim between the 2007 and 2009 legislative sessions where even the Director of the Government and Public Affairs Division (GPA), Coby Chaseadmitted in testimony before the State Affairs Committee that “maybe we did overdo it.” Both chambers overwhelmingly passed this bill to send a clear message that TxDOT can only provide public information not crossover into public persuasion on the taxpayers’ dime. As a result of its overreach, the TxDOT sunset bill, HB 300 (which failed to pass), had required the GPA division report directly to the Legislature.

In 2007, TxDOT raised eyebrows when it waged an ad campaign called Keep Texas Moving that clearly tried to change public opinion in favor of Perry’s toll road policies, including hiring registered lobbyists (in excess of $100,000 a month) to get buy-in from local elected officials for the Trans Texas Corridor and persuade members of Congress to allow TxDOT to buy-back existing interstates for the purpose of tolling them. (Read more here.)

TURF vs. TxDOT before the Appeals Court

TURF appeared before the Third District Court of Appeals April 24, 2009, in its lawsuit (TURF vs. Texas Department of Transportation or TxDOT) to halt the misuse of taxpayer money for attempting to sell the public on toll roads. Justices demonstrated they were monitoring the actions of the lawmakers in regards to legislation pertaining to the case and noted that the Legislature had acted. TURF attorney, Charles Riley, pointed out that the public cannot be assured TxDOT has been restrained by proposed legislation since the Governor could still veto it. Unfortunately, Riley was proven right by Perry’s veto Friday. Perry’s veto all but ensures the case will continue.

The lawsuit was brought in September 2007 pursuant to § 37, Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. TURF believes the law clearly prohibits TxDOT’s expenditure of public funds for the Keep Texas Movingpro-toll, pro-Trans Texas Corridor propaganda campaign.

TxDOT has violated § 556.004 of the Texas Government Code by directing the expenditure of public funds for political advocacy in support of toll roads and the Trans Texas Corridor, and have directly lobbied the United States Congress in favor of additional toll road programs as evidenced in its report, Forward Momentum.

Not a license to lobby the public and elected officials

TxDOT claims it has the authority to advertise and promote toll roads citing Chapter 228.004 of the Transportation Code. However, lawmakers have stated they never intended that law to give license to TxDOT to lobby the public in favor of toll road policy, but rather advertising more akin to “get your Toll Tag here.” Rep. Lois Kolkhorst said in an Express-News article in September 2007, "The Legislature did not tell TxDOT to go on a media campaign explaining the pros of the Trans-Texas Corridor and private equity investment (in toll roads).”

“TxDOT is still waging a one-sided political campaign designed to sway public opinion in favor of the policy that puts money in TxDOT’s own coffers. TxDOT may have ceased hiring outside consultants, but by its own admission, it has instead hired an in-house lobbyist, and its Keep Texas Moving web site and use of Department resources continue to attempt to get buy-in for toll roads from lawmakers and the public alike,” says an incredulous Hall.

On August 22, 2007, TURF filed a formal complaint with the Travis County District Attorney to investigate TxDOT’s illegal lobbying and asked him to prosecute TxDOT for criminal wrongdoing. See the formal complaint here. TURF's petition seeks to stop TxDOT's misuse of taxpayer money in a civil proceeding.

Terri Hall is the Founder of Texas TURF. TURF is a non-partisan grassroots group of citizens concerned about toll road policy

KUDOS to Dallas Observer for Coverage of Dallas Budget Process

2009-06-18T03:53:00.007-06:00

By Faith Chatham - DFWRCC - June 18, 2009
It's refreshing to see reports of an elected official break from "incumbent-speak" and call fee increases what they actually are: "tax increases." Mithcell Rasansky has done it before but this is the first time I've seen it this prominent in a report.

It has happened many more times than it has been reported. I hope it keeps happening more often and I hope reporters will take note and include it in their coverage. Fees are taxes. Tolls are taxes. Ignoring them and excluding them from receipts and tax percentage numbers is shoddy bookkeeping. It is done in attempts to deceive the public.

I don't think most people are that dumb or that gullible. Most people realize the difference between the money they start out with and the money they miss at the end of the day.

The Dallas Observer's coverage captures the "flavor" of City of Dallas Budget meetings. I hope more elected officials on more levels will follow Councilwoman Angela Hunt's example and plug the numbers into spreadsheets. If the numbers given don't add up, demand clarification in terms that the numbers do add up before a vote is taken. If votes are attempted before comprehendable clarification is given, object to the vote in strong enough terms that reporters who dozed off for a minute wake up and take note!

Rasansky Calls Budget "Non-Transparent," Says Increased Fees Are a Tax Increase and Introduces $21.7 Million in Savings

By Sam Merten in News You Can Actually Use, Actually Use - Dallas Observer - Wednesday, Jun. 17 2009

City Manager Mary Suhm, Mayor Tom Leppert and CFO Dave Cook all stressed this morning that the city is facing the same budget challenges as other cities and states. As Cook briefed the city council for the last time before a more detailed budget is presented August 10, he said the more than 700 projected layoffs are expected to begin in August and claimed most other cities are in worse shape as some are laying off police officers, while Dallas plans to hire another 200 officers in the coming fiscal year.

He cited approximately $130 million in declining revenue as the most significant contributor to the $190 million deficit, and said Dallas is using similar methods as other cities to address the shortfall, such as implementing furlough days (which saves Dallas approximately $800,000 per day), closing public buildings and increasing user fees instead of raising taxes.

But, as far as Mitchell Rasansky is concerned, jacking up fees and raising taxes are one in the same. He claimed the proposed increases to utilities are equivalent to a 2.3 cent property tax hike.

"This is a tax increase," Rasansky said. "Anyway you want to look at it, it's a tax increase."

Long known as the council's tax hawk, Rasansky made the most out of his last opportunity to weigh in on the budget before he's replaced on Monday by Ann Margolin, who was in attendance. After thanking Suhm and her staff for their work, he offered some harsh criticism of the proposed budget.

"This is the most non-transparent budget I've ever seen since I've been down here at City Hall," he said.

Rasansky battled Leppert twice because the mayor only gave council members five minutes each to speak, as Rasansky blasted him for not giving him time to explain all of the $21.7 million in cuts he proposed.

He handed out a memo to the council (which you can see below) suggesting the city dip into the "unrealized gain" of $21.2 million in the city's investment pool that won't mature until early 2010. Although he acknowledged the city will lose some dough by cashing in early, he said pulling out $7.5 million would serve to close the gap or fund services on the chopping block.

Also among his nine suggestions is grabbing $10 million from the city's contingency fund that has contained approximately $20 million for the last 20 years and removing $1.5 million from the city's $5 million emergency fund.

Other cost-cutting measures offered up by Rasansky are reducing the Trinity River Corridor Project staff from 15 to eight, combining city bills into the same envelope, selling advertising on the envelopes and charging developers a 1-percent application fee when applying for tax abatements or other incentives.

Angela Hunt said she's confused about why Suhm can't provide council members with line item budgets to assist them in finding cuts and understanding how the money is spent. Suhm said cooking up a line item budget would force city staff to stop work on the budget, and she stressed that the numbers change on a daily basis.

Hunt also asked once again for the budget to be separated into departments, saying her constituents "don't think in terms of key focus areas." She dropped some numbers into an Excel spreadsheet on her own and expressed concern that it appears as though the Public Works and Transportation Department's budget will increase by more than 50 percent from the actual 2007-08 budget.

While it's a rough draft, her document (which was provided to Unfair Park) shows reductions of 73.7 percent to housing and 31.6 percent to libraries compared to the '07-'08 budget, yet the mayor and city council's budget is planning to see a 10.2 increase in funding.

"We've all got to roll up our sleeves on this budget because it's so challenging," she said.

Dave Neumann appeared enamored with Hunt, using her as an example on two separate occasions, once as a hypothetical constituent and another time as a citizen. He also praised her for previous comments when she stressed that the city must focus on providing citizens with core competencies.

"This is not a wish-list year for the budget," he said. "It's an essential-list year."

Dallas Observer

DFW has second-worst road rage in nation

2009-06-17T06:18:00.005-06:00

BY LEE WILLIAMS - The Fort Worth Star-Telegram - Tue, Jun. 16, 2009
Drivers in Dallas-Fort Worth are rude, angry, distracted and often dangerous.

So much, in fact, that we rank No. 2 among metropolitan areas with the worst road rage, according to a survey released Tuesday by the Affinion Group, a national marketing and consulting firm.

Coming in at No. 1 was New York (big surprise). Detroit was No. 3, followed by Atlanta and Minneapolis-St. Paul. Miami, which had been No. 1 for four years, dropped to No. 7, and Houston, the only other Texas city mentioned, came in at No. 8.

The AutoVantage In the Driver’s Seat Road Rage Survey is based on interviews in the top 25 metro areas in the United States.

"The thing that really drove Dallas-Fort Worth up the list was that drivers were No. 1 for confessing to tailgating, cutting off people . . . and admitting that they talk on their cellphones," said Michael Bush, Affinion’s public relations director.

Those surveyed also said that texting, speeding, eating and putting on makeup led to incidents of road rage.
Read more in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram

Texas AG Declares North Texas Toll Contracts "legally insufficient"

2009-06-15T21:46:00.007-06:00

By MICHAEL A. LINDENBERGER - The Dallas Morning News - Friday, June 12, 2009

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott has refused to sign off on the first of two major private toll road projects approved for North Texas earlier this year.
Abbott said provisions in the contract with the Spanish firm Cintra, which is slated to build the North Tarrant Express in Fort Worth and the mid-cities, violate the Texas Constitution and must be amended.

State law gives Abbott the power to hold up the contracts indefinitely if they are not "legally sufficient."

Negotiations between his office and the department have already extended for weeks beyond an initial 60-day deadline.

Cintra has agreed to spend billions in North Texas to build the North Tarrant Express toll road and to rebuild the LBJ Freeway.

But in return, the state department of transportation has pledged more than $1 billion in tax dollars toward the projects. As a result, main lanes on both highways will be free, but Cintra will collect tolls for 52 years on adjacent lanes.

The LBJ Freeway contract has not yet been reviewed, but it is likely to be saddled with the same legal issues.

Abbott said the department's contract for the North Tarrant Express obligates the state to pay $740 million over several years to Cintra.

"The Texas Constitution says that one Legislature cannot financially bind a future Legislature," he said.

The contract must be amended to reflect that any promises for payment are subject to discretion of future sessions of the Legislature, Abbott said.

Any provision that leaves payments from the state subject to future action by the Legislature could give Cintra pause.

TxDOT continues to work to meet Abbott's objections and to settle on terms agreeable to Cintra, spokesman Chris Lippincott said.
Read more in the Dallas Morning News

Lower traffic and toll revenue prompts $108 Million decrease in NTTA 2009 Budget

2009-06-15T20:51:00.004-06:00

NTTA Reduces 2009 Budget and Other Expense Estimates
By NTTA - June 15, 2009

Plano, TX – Today, at a meeting of the North Texas Tollway Authority (NTTA) Administration Committee, staff announced it reduced the 2009 budget and other expense estimates by approximately $108 million as a result of a 10.91% decrease in projected revenues for 2009. The revenue projections for 2009 were lowered by the NTTA’s traffic and revenue consultant after they reviewed the traffic numbers for the first four months of 2009.

The reductions were made in the capital improvement, reserve maintenance and feasibility study funds.

“We will continue to monitor the situation and make adjustments where necessary,” said Allen Clemson, the NTTA’s Executive Director. “Despite the reduction, projects such as the Lewisville Lake Toll Bridge, Eastern Extension of the President George Bush Turnpike and construction on the Sam Rayburn Tollway will remain on schedule. We will also continue serving our customers and working hard to meet our commitments to the region.”

Tomorrow, NTTA staff is expected to recommend a toll rate adjustment to the NTTA System Finance and Audit Commitee, including adjusting the rates, reset dates and adopting a distance-based toll.

About the NTTA

The North Texas Tollway Authority, a political subdivision of the state of Texas, is authorized to acquire, construct, maintain, repair and operate turnpike projects in the north Texas region. The nine-member governing board is comprised of Chairman Paul N. Wageman; Vice Chairman Victor Vandergriff; and Directors Kenneth Barr, Gary Base, Bob Day, David Denison, Michael Nowels, Bob Shepard and Alan E. Sims.

The NTTA serves Collin, Dallas, Denton and Tarrant counties and is responsible for the NTTA System, consisting of the Dallas North Tollway, President George Bush Turnpike, Sam Rayburn Tollway, Addison Airport Toll Tunnel, Lewisville Lake Toll Bridge and the Mountain Creek Lake Bridge. The NTTA is able to raise capital for construction projects through the issuance of turnpike revenue bonds. NTTA toll projects are not a part of the state highway system and receive no direct tax funding. Tolls are collected to repay debt and to operate and maintain the roadways.

Trinity toll road delay may extend to 2016

2009-06-01T18:28:00.001-06:00

By BRAD WATSOn - WFAA-TV - Monday, June 1, 2009
DALLAS - Dallas Mayor Tom Leppert's goal of finishing the Trinity River toll road by 2014 sank Monday with the announcement that the controversial highway won't be done until perhaps 2016, if then.

Design work will stop while the city spends millions of dollars to study and repair the levees.

Approved by voters in 1998, the latest deadline to open the Trinity toll road in 2014 slipped away just like all the others.

"It will be put off into the 2015, 2016 time frame, and that will be the 20-month delay on it," he said.

The city must spend $29 million to study what levee repairs to make after the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers rated the levees flood protection unacceptable.

The Corps found too much erosion, obstacles like trees in the floodway and bridge penetrations in the levees.

The repairs will cost more that the Corps may share. The impact to residential and commercial property owners along the river is immediate.

If the city can't prove to the federal government by early 2011 that the levees are sound or make the repairs then the government will declare Dallas has no flood protection.

"We're saying it’s the prudent thing right now to go ahead get flood insurance when it’s the low rates," Leppert advised property owners.

The delay could push the $1.8-billion toll road past $2 billion.

Critics, like city council member Angela Hunt, said the planned highway between the levees should be dropped from the Trinity project to move ahead with levee and park improvements.

"We've got to untangle these projects so that those projects aren't all delayed by two years because of the delay on the toll road," she said.

But that wouldn't solve the worsening downtown traffic congestion the toll road is to help relieve.

For now, the city and Leppert said they believe the best choice is to press on.

"And we're not going to give up," Leppert said. "There's too much at stake for that.”

Construction costs should stabalize or decrease: Continuing on a downward trend, the price of construction materials fell 0.4 percent in April 2009

2009-05-24T10:18:00.004-06:00

Construction Materials Prices Trend Lower in April

Continuing on a downward trend, the price of construction materials fell 0.4 percent in April 2009, according to the May 14 producer price index (PPI) report by the U.S. Labor Department. On a year-over-year basis, construction input prices dropped 3.7 percent (see graph below).

Asphalt felts and coatings prices dropped 10.5 percent in April, the largest month-over-month decline in 55 years. Prices for fabricated structural metal products fell by 1.0 percent from March making the seventh consecutive montly decline, but are still up 0.7 percent on a year-over-year basis. Fabricated ferrous wire prices decreased 0.7 percent in April while maintaining a year-over-year increase of 2.9 percent.

In contrast, softwood lumber prices increased, for the first time in seven months, by 1.6 percent. Still, year-over-year, softwood lumber prices are down 10.2 percent. Plumbing fixtures and fittings prices rose by 0.5 percent compared to the previous month, and are 1.1 percent higher than a year ago.

Crude energy prices went up by 2.9 percent in April after a 1.6 percent increase in March, driven by an increase in crude petroleum prices of 9.2 percent. Overall, a spike in food costs drove the nation’s wholesale prices up 0.3 percent from March, but prices are still down 3.5 percent on a year-over-year basis.

“Given the weakness of the broader economy, lower construction materials prices are a necessary ingredient to stimulate nonresidential construction in segments not directly impacted by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009," said Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC) Chief Economicst Anirban Basu. "It is hoped that producer prices will remain low or continue to decline allowing developers to move ahead with projects, in part, because of limited financing opportunities.

“However, there remains significant debate regarding the recent run-up in oil and other commodity prices. Some believe that this is a reflection of rising inflationary expectations, which are emerging primarily due to a combination of extreme monetary and fiscal stimulus,” added Basu. “Others believe that there are more mundane explanations, including growing seasonal demand for certain commodities and growing confidence in the performance of the global economy as 2010 approaches.

“Whatever the explanatory factors, any consequential increase in construction materials prices would be unfortunate from a broader national perspective,” said Basu. “The nation remains in the midst of a period characterized by substantial infrastructure investment, and rising construction materials prices would ultimately hurt the ability of federal, state and local governments to purchase more infrastructure projects.”

Action Alert- Eyes on the TX Leg: Carona's SB404 Extending CDAs on Toll Roads sent to House Calendar for Vote

2009-05-19T11:25:00.005-06:00

Research by Martha Estes - May 19, 2009
Source: Texas Legislature On-Line
House Cmte. Report sent to Calendars 05/19/2009
The HOUSE Transportation Cmte. reported on SB 404 by Carona.
Caption: Relating to the authority of certain toll project entities to enter into a comprehensive development agreement
It will probably appear on a HOUSE calendar very soon.
An analysis is offered below from TLO.

BILL ANALYSIS C.S.S.B. 404 By: Carona
Transportation Committee Report (Substituted)

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

H.B. 3588, Acts of the 78th Legislature, Regular Session, 2003, changes the structure of Texas transportation infrastructure financing by allowing public-private partnerships as a means for developing transportation infrastructure through comprehensive development agreements (CDAs). Chapters 223 and 370, Transportation Code, authorize the use of CDAs; however, the authority provided for under these chapters expires in August 2009. With limited means of funding transportation projects, CDAs are a necessary tool for providing financing for future transportation infrastructure.

C.S.S.B. 404 extends that the authority of the Texas Department of Transportation or a regional mobility authority to enter into comprehensive development agreements, for an additional four years.

RULEMAKING AUTHORITY

It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution.

ANALYSIS

C.S.S.B. 404 amends the Transportation Code to postpone from August 31, 2009, to August 31, 2013, the expiration date for the authority of the Texas Department of Transportation or a regional mobility authority to enter into comprehensive development agreements and to postpone from August 31, 2011, to August 31, 2015, the expiration date with respect to certain exempted projects. The bill specifies that its provisions take effect only if S.B. 17 or another similar bill of the 81st Legislature, Regular Session, 2009, relating to the design, development, financing, construction, and operation of certain toll projects, including the determination of the primacy process for local toll project entities, becomes law.

EFFECTIVE DATE

Except as otherwise provided, September 1, 2009.

COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL AND SUBSTITUTE

C.S.S.B. 404 postpones the expiration dates relating to the authority of the Texas Department of Transportation or a regional mobility authority to enter into comprehensive development agreements for four years, rather than six years as in the original.

ACTON ALERT: TELL LEGISLATURE TO PASS Tx H.B. 15

2009-05-14T11:11:00.004-06:00

BILL ANALYSIS (Texas) H.B. 15

By: Leibowitz

Transportation Committee Report (Unamended)

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

A metropolitan planning organization (MPO) is an agency created under federal law to provide local input for urban transportation planning and allocating federal transportation funds in cities with a population greater than 50,000. There are twenty-five MPOs in Texas. The largest is the Dallas-Fort Worth MPO and the smallest is the Sherman-Denison MPO. Each MPO receives federal funding for transportation planning. Many receive state andocal funds as well in order to carry out their planning activities.

Transportation planning decisions are made by the policy board of an MPO. This can be as benign as the planning of bike routes in an urban area or as controversial as the construction of toll roads. The policy board of an MPO can be made up of a mix of elected and non-elected officials. Currently, unelected officials, some not even permanent residents of the urban area affected by the MPO they sit on, cast votes on approving the construction of toll roads. Unelected officials who are not accountable to voters should not be allowed to essentially levy a tax on the citizens of a community.

H.B. 15 allows only the elected officials on an MPO policy board to vote on toll road projects.

RULEMAKING AUTHORITY
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution.

ANALYSIS:
H.B. 15 amends the Transportation Code to prohibit a member of the policy board of a metropolitan planning organization from participating in a vote of the board to approve the construction of a new toll project or the conversion of a nontolled project to a toll project unless the member is an elected official.

H.B. 15 provides for the prohibition to take effect, either as an amendment to Chapter 371, Transportation Code, as added by Chapter 103 (H.B. 570), Acts of the 80th Legislature, Regular Session, 2007, or as an amendment to Chapter 372, Transportation Code, as redesignated by and contingent on passage of the Act of the 81st Legislature, Regular Session, 2009, relating to nonsubstantive additions to and corrections in existing codes.

EFFECTIVE DATE: September 1, 2009.

Source: Texas Legislature On Line

NOTE FROM FAITH CHATHAM: 12:27 P.M. May 14, 2009
Rep. Frost's aide says this bill was on yesterday's House Calendar for the second reading and was not voted on. It is late in the session and it appears that it is too late for this bill to be passed. Texans will continue to have non elected persons sit on Metropolitan Planning Organization, deciding what roads will and will not be planned, built and funded!

Channel 33 on Tolls or Gas Tax

2009-05-14T09:44:00.003-06:00

CLICK HERE TO PARTICIPATE IN POLL:

Revamp of Texas Department of Transportation gains momentum

2009-05-08T08:25:00.003-06:00

By DAVE MONTGOMERY - Fort Worth Star Telegram - May 7, 2009
AUSTIN — House members took strong steps late Thursday to make the massive state transportation bureaucracy more accountable to the public, calling for an elected statewide commissioner and 14 elected representatives.

House members rejected a proposal that would have required the Texas Department of Transportation to buy environmentally friendly "green cement" in what lawmakers said was a slap at Midlothian cement plants blamed for much of the pollution in North Texas.

The legislation under consideration by the House would continue the department for another four years while strengthening state oversight in hopes of averting problems. The bill is designed to curb some of the powers the department amassed earlier in the decade and dissolve what Rep. Linda Harper-Brown, R-Irving, described as a "backdrop of distrust and frustration."

The amendment requiring green-cement purchases, defeated by a vote of 97-30, touched off a contentious debate between Rep. Jim Pitts, R-Waxahachie, whose district includes the Midlothian plants, and North Texas lawmakers insisting on tougher controls over the kilns.

"Mr. Pitts, you know I love you, but I have to stand up for the people in my district and the children in my district," Rep. Paula Pierson, D-Arlington, said as she debated Pitts from the microphone at the rear of the chamber.

Though Midlothian was never mentioned, the intent of the amendment by Rep. Roberto Alonzo, D-Dallas, was clear. It would have required the use of so-called dry technology that produces fewer pollutants, instead of the older "wet" technology used in Midlothian.

Over a half-dozen local governments, including Tarrant County, Fort Worth, Dallas, Arlington and Plano, have adopted "green cement" purchasing preferences.

"How dare you come into my district and try to close a plant" that has been an economic boost to the area, Pitts told Alonzo, saying that emissions in the area have been reduced by 64 percent over the past decade. Pitts said automobile emissions produce "more pollution than this plant."

"Our biggest problem [in North Texas] is not this plant — it’s highway traffic," Pitts said.

Rep. Lon Burnam, D-Fort Worth, told Pitts that "it’s pretty outrageous for you" to suggest that North Texas residents should not be concerned about pollution from the cement kilns, adding that "children in my district are breathing bad air" because of the emissions.

The bill stems from the sunset review process that requires lawmakers to examine the performance of selected state agencies during each legislative session.

The Transportation Department sunset bill is considered one of lawmakers’ top priorities this session, reflecting the scope of the bureaucracy, the importance of transportation projects and legislators’ desire to put the department under greater scrutiny. Lawmakers faced 162 amendments as they began debate on the bill.

"The public felt like they were not involved in the process at all, and all the members of the House felt the same way," Harper-Brown said.

North Texas leaders consider transportation their top issue as they develop regional strategies to deal with congestion and pollution that threatens to hamstring economic growth. The need for additional roadways across the state has increased with the population, leaving Texas with an estimated $300 billion shortfall in transportation needs.

The Transportation Department had a budget of $17.5 billion for the 2008-09 fiscal biennium, much of which was devoted to planning, building and maintaining roads and bridges, according to the House Research Organization. The department has a staff of 14,500 in its Austin headquarters and 25 district offices.

House members rejected efforts to strip one of the bill’s cornerstones, a legislative oversight committee designed to make recommendations for state transportation needs.
DAVE MONTGOMERY, 512-476-4294

Read more in the Fort Worth Star Telegram

Stamp Out Hunger Food Drive May 9th

2009-05-04T10:10:00.000-06:00

Saturday May 9, 2009

NALC - Stamp Out Hunger

The National Association of Letter Carriers' Stamp Out Hunger food drive is the largest one-day food drive in the nation. On May 9th, North Texas residents are encouraged to donate non-perishable food items and place them by their mailbox for their letter carrier to collect. Letter carriers will then deliver the food to the North Texas Food Bank where it will be sorted by volunteers and distributed to the Food Bank's 917 feeding and education programs in 13 North Texas counties. Don't forget: Leave non-perishables by your mailbox May 9th!
North Texas Food Bank http://www.ntfb.org/

Legislative Alerts: Senate Bills Scheduled for Consideration May 4

2009-05-03T17:14:00.004-06:00

By Martha Estes - May 3, 2009
SENATE

Mon. May 4th @ 11am in SENATE Chamber
Postponed Business:
SB 18 (CS) Estes/ et al.

Relating to the use of eminent domain authority. Co-authors: Carona, Deuell, Eltife, Harris, Hegar, Hinojosa, Mike Jackson, Dan Patrick, Seliger, Shapiro, Uresti, Van de Putte, West, Williams, Zaffirini
Analysis (as filed): http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/81R/analysis/html/SB00018I.htm

Currently, the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the taking of private property for public use without just compensation, commonly referred to as the "takings clause." Section 17, Article I, Texas Constitution, prohibits a person's property from being taken, damaged, or destroyed without consent for public use without adequate compensation.

As proposed, S.B. 18 modifies the process governing eminent domain proceedings, standards of evidence that could be considered by a court in the course of making decisions regarding damages, obligations placed upon condemning entities, and the rights of previous owners to repurchase taken property. S.B. 18 authorizes special commissioners to take into account any evidence that a property owner would consider in a negotiated transaction outside the standards set forth in the chapter. This bill modifies the price at which previous owners could repurchase condemned property on which a public use was cancelled within 10 years of the acquisitions to be the price paid to the owner by the governmental entity at the time the property originally was acquired, rather than the fair market value of the property at the time the public use was canceled. S.B. 18 requires a governmental entity, for each property or group of jointly owned contiguous properties to be condemned, to formally authorize by motion the initiation of condemnation proceedings at a public hearing by a record vote by adding the Truth in Condemnation Procedures Act. S.B. 18 requires the comptroller of public accounts to identify all entities public and private, with eminent domain authority and make recommendations to the legislature regarding that authority.

Second Reading:

SB 1282 Williams
Caption: Relating to the powers of certain freight rail districts

SB 1283 Williams
Caption: Relating to the supervision by the TxDOT of money appropriated by the federal government for the construction and maintenance of rail facilities

SB 1923 Watson
Caption: Relating to funding sources for the Texas rail relocation and improvement fund

SB 612 (LC) Shapleigh
Caption: Relating to the powers and duties of the TxDOT related to rail facilities

SB 1570 (LC) Carona Caption: Relating to the facilitation, analysis, and implementation of high-speed passenger rail in this state.

SB 1382 (LC) Carona Relating to the coordination of the planning, construction, operation, and maintenance of a statewide passenger rail system by the TxDOT

SB 2096 (CS) (LC) Wentworth
Caption: Relating to the creation of and the powers of a comprehensive multimodal urban transportation authority, including the power to impose taxes, issue bonds, and exercise limited eminent domain authority

SB 1351 (CS) (LC) Carona
Caption: Relating to the terms of the members of the Texas Transportation Commission (2 years)

SB 505 (CS) Ogden Caption: Relating to authorizing the designation of an area adjacent to a state highway project as a transportation finance zone and requiring that the revenue from the state sales and use taxes imposed in the zone be used to pay obligations issued in connection with the project.

DFW Regional Concerned Citizens and The Arlington Texan Endorse Terry Meza

2009-05-01T11:57:00.006-06:00

Both Place 5 Arlington City Council candidates have track records and deep roots in the district. Better educated, Terry Meza has multiple degrees in Law, Education and Urban Affairs while Mrs. Wolff, who has served 6 years as Councilwoman, completed one year of college. Meza's record spearheading community revitalization in historic neighborhoods in Fort Worth and Midland, makes her a good fit for this district which desperately need her skill in job creation, business development and neighborhood revitalization. Councilwoman Wolff’s is named in a lawsuit seeking payment of a judgment from a 1990 bankruptcy filed by her and her husband listing debts of $97,510,536.38. Her description of it in the League of Women Voters Candidate's Survey as “One frivolous lawsuit not followed-up..” and the staggering amount of the unsecured debt concerns us.

Wolff lists some Meza supporters as endorsers! In addition to those mentioned in a Fort Worth Star Telegram article, at least one member of our organization, a Meza volunteer and donor, was surprised to see his name on Mrs. Wolff's list of endorsers.

Mrs. Wolff is proud of the investment in infrastructure in the district. The district, which runs from Pantego to the Grand Prairie City Limits through central Arlington, contains neighborhoods ranging from upper middle income to lower income. The majority of the investment in infrastructure has been concentrated west of Collins Street while east Arlington continues to be neglected. Terry Meza will champion the neglected area of the district while supporting development throughout the district.

Until Councilwoman Wolff clears up her family legal and financial problems, we recommend that District 5 voters elect Terry Meza to the Arlington City Council.

International Toll Investor, Macquarie posts losses

2009-05-01T08:48:00.001-06:00

May 1, 2009
By MERAIAH FOLEY
Macquarie Posts Decline in Annual Profit

SYDNEY — The largest Australian investment bank, Macquarie Group, posted its first fall in annual profit in 17 years Thursday, citing billions of dollars in losses stemming from the global slowdown.

Macquarie said net profit for the year that ended March 31 had fallen 52 percent to 871 million Australian dollars, or $635 million, from a record 1.8 billion dollars the year before. The widely expected result fell just short of the bank’s February profit forecast of 900 million dollars.

Later in the day, the bank confirmed it had raised 540 million dollars in an institutional placement of new shares at 27 dollars per share, Reuters reported.

Though Macquarie and other large Australian banks have been largely insulated from the pain suffered by their counterparts on Wall Street and in Europe, the result released Friday was the investment juggernaut’s worst since 1992, during the country’s previous recession.

Macquarie blamed “testing global market conditions” for the result, which included 2.5 billion dollars in one-time losses. Listed among the write-downs were 1.47 billion dollars in losses associated with managed funds and infrastructure assets; 496 million dollars in bad loans, mostly for property and mineral investments; and 248 million dollars in costs from the sale of its Italian mortgage business.

On the upside, Macquarie touted its relatively healthy balance sheet, with cash and liquid assets totaling 30.8 billion dollars and total capital of 10.2 billion dollars, which is 3.1 billion dollars more than the minimum required by Australian regulators.

Nevertheless, the bank requested Thursday that trading in its shares be halted while it considered plans to raise additional capital. There were no further details of the plans in the bank’s statement to the Australian Securities Exchange on Friday, but the Macquarie chief executive, Nicholas Moore, warned of continued uncertainty ahead.

“While there were some early signs of markets stabilizing in March and April,” Mr. Moore said, “significant uncertainties remain, and it is still too early to make any judgments on sustained market improvements.”

Until now, Macquarie has been one of the few banks around the globe that have not approached its shareholders for more money since the financial meltdown began last year.

Tim Schroeders, a portfolio manager at Pengana Capital, said that the announcement made Thursday was more of a reflection of changing banking conditions than a sign of trouble at Macquarie.

“The leverage that was previously in the banking system prior to the global financial crisis is no longer prudent, and as a result, banks are requiring more capital and returning less on that capital,” he said. “There are going to be adjustments required to reposition the business to be optimally profitable over the next 10 years.”
Read more in the New York Times

DFW Regional Concerned Citizens Endorses Harriet Irby

2009-04-29T15:22:00.001-06:00

By Faith Chatham - DFWRCC - April 29, 2009

Serving the community of Pantego for 38 years, Harriet Irby is academically trained in urban government. Her opponent, a 5-year resident and one-term councilman, is lax in filing expense reports when spending taxpayers’ money! Irby fights valiantly to make our political system transparent, fair and equitable for everyone, even those who disagree with her. Serving 30 years as election judge, Irby is fastidious in following the law, checking facts, evaluating sources, and consulting experts to verify data before she speaks or votes. The Town Council declared December 1, 2007 Harriet Irby Day in Pantego, noting Irby’s “deep and genuine love for this town”, serving “the community with distinction by performing a variety of public appointments and offices “, and “willingness to place her concern for the public and good above her own personal interest” These qualities are needed in all public servants. She’ll be an asset on the Town Council.

DFW Regional Concerned Citizens applauds Irby's consistent opposition to privitazion of public infrastructure. She opposes use of eminent domain for private gain! She understands complex transportation and environmental issues and works to preserve air, water and transportation for use by all citizens of this region.

Faith Chatham
Co-founder of DFW Regional Concerned Citizens

"Air Emissions from Oil and Gas Development in the Barnett Shale and the Rest of Texas"

2009-04-27T00:00:00.003-06:00

Arlington Conservation Council and Green Arlington Foundation presents:
"Air Emissions from Oil and Gas Development in the Barnett Shale and the Rest of Texas"
By Dr. Al Armendariz

Wednesday, May 13, 2009, 7 pm

West Police Station, 2060 W Green Oaks Blvd, Arlington, Texas

Everyone is invited to attend this free lecture. Dr. Armendariz is a Research Associate Professor in the Department of Environmental and Civil Engineering at Southern Methodist University in Dallas and has written extensively on air quality issues related to industrial activity and gas drilling.

Presented by the Arlington Conservation Council and the Green Arlington Foundation.

For information, call 214 850 2412.

ATA Applauds the Introduction of Anti-Privatization Legislation

2009-04-26T14:39:00.002-06:00

Saturday, April 25, 2009

The American Trucking Associations (ATA) applauds U.S. Senators Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) for their introduction of the “Transportation Access for All Americans Act,” (S. 885) and the “Transportation Equity for All Americans Act” (S. 884) on April 24.

The legislation will eliminate expensive federal subsidies that now flow to privatized highways. When a state or city leases a highway, it receives significant compensation, but taxpayers always end up paying higher tolls to the private operator.

“I would like to thank Senator Bingaman and Senator Grassley for their leadership,” says ATA President and CEO Bill Graves. “We look forward to working with both gentlemen on this critical issue,” he added.

Privatization is dismantling the nation’s interstate highway network. The United States cannot maintain a national highway network if key segments are leased to the highest bidder. More than money is at stake. Leasing roadways allows states only to postpone, not solve, their budget problems — and without understanding the long-term implications.

The American Trucking Associations is the largest national trade association for the trucking industry. Through a federation of other trucking groups, industry-related conferences, and its 50 affiliated state trucking associations, ATA represents more than 37,000 members covering every type of motor carrier in the United States.

----------
Library of Congress THOMAS http://thomas.loc.gov/ (General Access LINK to Congress)
Link for BILL Searches:
S.884
Title: A bill to amend title 23, United States Code, to remove privatized highway miles as a factor in apportioning highway funding.
Cosponsors: Sen Bingaman, Jeff [D-NM] & Sen Grassley, Chuck [R-IA] (introduced 4/23/2009)
Latest Major Action: 4/23/2009 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Cmte. on Environment and Public Works
--------
S.885
Title: A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide special depreciation and amortization rules for highway and related property subject to long-term leases, and for other purposes.
Cosponsors: Sen Bingaman, Jeff [NM] & Sen Grassley, Chuck [IA] (introduced 4/23/2009)
Latest Major Action: 4/23/2009 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Cmte. on Finance

Spending records of Barton's charitable foundation raises questions

2009-04-26T09:18:00.003-06:00

By LAURA ISENSEE - The Dallas Morning News - Tuesday, April 7, 2009

WASHINGTON – Rep. Joe Barton's charitable foundation, which has drawn headlines for the Arlington Republican, has spent more in overhead than on public causes, according to a published report.

A story in Monday's Washington Times noted that the charity started by Barton, the top Republican on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, raised money from industries with a stake in his committee's business and took credit for some donations that corporations made directly to local nonprofits.

The fundraising is "perfectly legal and by the books," said Sean Brown, a spokesman for Barton.

In its first three years, the Joe Barton Family Foundation spent more on overhead – about $130,000 – than it gave to charity. In 2006, it donated $90,000 to construct a new 10,000-square-foot facility for Boys and Girls Club of Navarro County, according to the group's tax reports.

The organization formed as a tax-exempt public charity in 2005. Its mission is to help nonprofits, primarily in Barton's district, build large-scale capital projects. His daughter-in-law runs the Arlington-based organization.

Overall, Barton's foundation has spent less than a quarter of its funds on public causes, according to the Times.

The typical charity rated by the watchdog group Charity Navigator spends about 75 percent on programs and services and 25 percent toward administration and fundraising costs.

There is no one-size-fits-all for how much charities should spend on overhead, said Elizabeth Boris, who directs the Urban Institute's Center on Nonprofits and Philanthropy.
Read more in the Dallas Morning News

Rep. Senfronia Thompson's Ethic Commission reform bill scheduled for public hearing Mon. Apriil 20th

2009-04-18T13:20:00.003-06:00

By John Cobarruvias - Bay Area Houston - April 17, 2009State Representative Senfronia Thompson's Ethic Commission reform bill will be heard on Monday April 20 in the Elections Committee. This bill would prevent many of the violations identified in "Don't Mess with Ethics" including over $3 million in undisclosed expenditures by 95 Legislators as well as spending their donors money to buy condos, memberships to exclusive golf courses, and paying family members for personal services.

The problems with the Texas Ethics Commission can be fixed to prevent these gross violations in the future with HB3178.
COMMITTTEE: ELECTIONS
TIME & DATE: 2:00 PM or upon final adjourn./recess Monday, April 20, 2009
PLACE: E2.028
CHAIR: Rep. Todd Smith

Texas House of Representatives Deliberations on Transportation

2009-04-18T09:33:00.004-06:00

By Vince Leibowitz - Capitol Annex - Friday, April 17, 2008

[DFWRCC is posting the excerpts of Vince's live blogging/tweeting from yesterday's Texas House of Representatives debates and votes pertaining to transportation. Please visit Capitol Annex for Vince's play-by-play report on Texas House deliberations on Education and Criminal Justice.]
12:52 we’re back after a brief break.

12:56 amendment by Lon Burnam would require TXDoT to notify the Legislative Budget Board and each member of the Legislature of each waiver it intends to make that would waive any requirement of a toll?road entity to compensate property owners affected by projects. The notice would be required to be delivered to the LBB and each legislator at least 30 days prior to date on which the waiver would take effect.

12:57 amendment is temporarily withdrawn. Now to page 2 of supplemental packet no clue what that is. Unemployment fund amendnent. It is adopted.

1:00 a.m. Amendment by Guillen mandates that TxDOT adopt rules to allocate funds under general provisions of funding for public transportation in which the total amount appropriated for the Formula program is less the 90% and the Discretionary program is less than 10%. A provision is required to ensure that the specified programs do not receive less than allocated. Adopted.

1:02 a.m. Amendment by Davis of Dallas affirms that the Legislature’s intent is for the Texas Transportation Commission to approve funding projects that are geographically balanced across the state.

1:03 amendment by Frost would prohibit TXDoT from entering into contracts for any toll-related project that contains non?compete clauses.

1:06 Amendment by Burnam would require TXDoT to notify the Legislative Budget Board and each member of the Legislature of each waiver it intends to make that would waive any requirement of a toll?road entity to compensate property owners affected by projects. The notice would be required to be delivered to the LBB and each legislator at least 30 days prior to date on which the waiver would take effect. Acceptable to author. Has an amendment to Amendment.

1:08 Amendment by Darby would would decrease TWC General Revenue Dedicated
authority by $3,443,800 in FY 2010 and $2,405,179 in FY 2011. It would then increase Federal Funds authority in TWC Federal Account No. 5026 by $3,443,800 in FY 2010 and by $2,405,179 in FY 2011.

adopted

109: Amendment by Madden temp w/d’d.

1:09 Amendment by David that would prohibit funds appropriated to TXDoT in the budget from being used to contract with a foreign entity if the term of the contract is longer than 25 years.

Irby quizzed Arlington Mayor Pro Tem Ron Wright about danger of contamination to Pantego's Drinking Water in 2007

2009-04-12T13:16:00.002-06:00

Excerpt from Arlington Texan - Oct. 21, 2007

Harriet Irby, of Pantego, became concerned when she learned of gas drilling in adjacent Arlington and Fort Worth. Pantego and DalWorthington Gardens rely on well water for their municipal water supply. At a League of Women Voters Gas Drilling Symposium in 2006 Faith Chatham quizzed Arlington Mayor Pro Tem Ron Wright about the danger of contaminating drinking water through the gas development process. Mr. Wright blew it off as not an issue stating "Arlington doesn't get its drinking water from aquifiers." Harriet Irby spoke up and stated: "But we do in Pantego!" Mr. Wright's response was: "Arlington is always ready and willing to sell water to Pantego!"

Not satisfied with that answer, Ms. Irby began visiting the City Manager and Mayor of Pantego, alerting them to developments in neighboring Fort Worth and Arlington. Dale Henry was always just a telephone call away, advising her and educating her on technical issues which she presented to the leaders of her town. At the time, neither DalWorthington Gardens nor Pantego had gas drilling ordinances. Both have developed some and are polishing them now. Pantego's plans include water testing to establish a baseline plus requirements that gas drillers pay for perodic testing of the water supply. "These are, however, only measures that address part of the danger." Ms. Irby is also concerned with depletion of the water supply through Gas drilling.

Gas is removed from the ground by a fracing process which utilizes millions of gallons of water. Gas drilling is an industrial process which has encroached into high density residential neighborhoods in Tarrant County. In rural western Tarrant County, Parker County and Wise County, some water wells have been sucked dry by the drain on the aquifier by gas drilling. Residential water usage is monitored but industrial gas drilling is exempted from water conservation caps. Current Texas law does not require that water usage for gas drilling be recorded and reported.

Senate votes to END moratorium and sell off our highways to foreign toll operators! Bills now go to the House

2009-04-07T07:18:00.003-06:00

By Terri Hall - T.U.R.F. - April 6, 2009

The Texas Senate voted 29-2 in favor of re-authorizing private toll contracts that essentially sell our highways to the highest bidder. On a deal just signed in Dallas, Spain-based Cintra got the rights to charge us 75 cents a mile even though $500 million in gas taxes and other public subsidies will be used to build the project in yet another sweetheart deal for corporations and a raw deal for taxpayers! These contracts are also at the heart of the Trans Texas Corridor.

The two voting against were Senators Glenn Hegar and Wendy Davis. Thank Senator Hegar here: glenn.hegar@senate.state.tx.us. Wendy Davis actually wants MORE of these private toll contracts and voted against these bills because she wanted an open door for Cintra instead of giving public toll entities first crack at toll projects, so "no thanks," Senator Davis.

All senators but Wendy Davis voted for SB 17 that purports to protect taxpayers from private toll contracts, called CDAs, but is a sham since TxDOT and toll agencies can waive the steps and jump right to a CDA allowing private corporations to control our public infrastructure!

What Faith Chatham wants to see "tweeked" in Carona's Rail Financing Bill

2009-03-20T08:56:00.005-06:00

By Faith Chatham - DFWRCC - March 20, 2009
Financing passenger rail in Texas is one of the few true cures for gridlock and improvements to air quality in the DFW region. Congestion pricing and market valuation on tolled HOV lanes and toll roads will not cure gridlock or improve air quality. Getting cars off the roadways is a much better plan.

Arlington, Texas, in the center of the DFW Region, is the largest city in the USA without mass transit. Over 60% of the residents of Arlington work outside of the city and it is estimated that over 70% of those who work in Arlington reside outside of the city. Except fora pilot program for commuter bus service from two park and ride lots in Arlington to Fort Worth, every worker is dependent upon private automobiles for commuting to and from work. A similar scenario exists in neighboring Grand Prairie.

The Dorothy Spur runs through the downtown business/entertainment districts of both cities. That rail line is currently devoted entirely to freight transportation and a few Amtrak trains a day, none of which actually stop in either Arlington or Grand Prairie. Some freight is switched to feeder tracks in the Great Southwest Business District, but passengers are not allowed to board or exit any passenger train which passes through either of these cities.

Senator Carona authored SB942, a local option transportation bill, in an attempt to generate a source of funding for passenger rail which voters in each county can approve or reject to address regional rail needs throughout the state. SB942 needs a serious overhaul before it is voted on by the Senate or Texas Legislature. Two other rail financing bills, one by Sen. Truitt and one by Sen. Villarreal have been filed. Terry Hall of T.U.R.F. favors Senator Villarreal's version.

I am personally very interested in seeing a tighter, more precisely worded rail financing bill passed by both houses of the Texas Legislature. Current vague wording in all versions before the Senate present pittfalls.

Here is Faith Chatham's Wish List or list of "tweeks" for Rail Infrastructure Financing Bills:
1. Caps on potential taxes or fee increases should be lower. Currently many are so high that voters will reject all options because they vehemently object to the potential high cost of one or more potential options. The cap on proposed increase in vehicle registration or vehicle sales tax fees should be clearly stated and LOW ENOUGH THAT IT WILL BE ACCEPTABLE TO VOTERS!
2. Proposed tax increases should be tied to specific rail projects.
3. The bill(s) should clearly state that income generated from the tax or fee increase MUST be applied to the SPECIFIC PROJECT approved by the voters.
4. Instead of voter approval being optional, the language of the bill(s) must stipulate that the VOTERS MUST APPROVE THE TAX INCREASE FOR THE SPECIFIED PROJECT before public funds are spent on planning, environmental or construction of a proposed rail line or facility.
5. All bills must eliminate the requirement that citizens gather 10% of the signatures in that region of voters in the last governor's election before citizens are given opportunity to vote on the rail option. Instead, as stated in number 3, the language MUST STIPULATE CLEARLY that proposed increase in existing fees or taxes or imposition of new fees or taxes for proposed rail infrastructure projects be presented to the voters for approval before public funds are spent on proposed rail projects.
6. Passenger rail projects funded under these bills may not impose "congestion pricing" or "market pricing" on passenger rail tickets.
7. All fees or fee (tax) increase imposed on passenger vehicles under this act must also apply to commercial vehicles. Current bills exclude commercial vehicles from most proposed new taxes (fees).
8. When new fees (taxes) are presented to the voter, the bill should stipulate that there must be a sunset for the taxes stipulated in the wording on the ballot, clearly stating what specific project the funds are for and that they cannot be transferred to any other project without voter approval.
9. There should be a sunset in the bill for the expiration of the provisions of the bill stipulated in the language of the bill. After ten or twenty years, the taxpayers should be given opportunity to decide if these special financing options are the best options for their communities at that time.
10. There should be a cap on proposed fares for passenger rail funded under these options presented clearly in the language on the ballot when these options are presented to the voters.
11. There should be a sunset on particualar taxes when a sufficient income is generated to retire the construction debt for the project. Maintenance cost should be generated by passenger fees.
12. The language of the bill should allow muncipalities and districts within a county to vote on accepting or rejecting these options. Many Texans discount the overall economic drain air pollution has on each person. When voting to "tax" themselves more for rail, many will think only in terms of whether they personally will use the rail. The bill needs to allow municipalities within a county to exercise the funding options through approval by the voters in their municipality as well as counties to use the option through approval by the majority of the voters in the county.
13. All exemption should be defined in the text of the bill so it does not impose too great a burden on the middle class.
14. Public transit authorities should not have to operate on the same terms as potential private partners in competing for these contracts.

Massive Grapevine highway project could begin this year

2009-03-05T02:43:00.003-06:00

By NICHOLAS SAKELARIS and GORDON DICKSON - The Grapevine Courier / Star-Telegram - March 4, 2009
GRAPEVINE — The massive reconstruction of seven Grapevine highways — a $1 billion-plus project known as the DFW Connector — will change the appearance of the city.

And it will change the way motorists from other cities, and Grapevine residents themselves, get around.

Capacity on highways such as Texas 114/121 will double, with the addition of toll and nontoll lanes, making it possible for the first time in decades to drive through the once-sleepy farm town without encountering gridlock.

Gone will be the hair-pulling waits at traffic signals along William D. Tate Avenue, one of the main drags leading to the city’s "restaurant row."

"We don’t go into Grapevine in certain parts of the day because of the traffic. You can’t get around," said Michele Hoffman, who lives in the south part of the city. She supports the project, which may be managed by private developers.

The Texas Department of Transportation, which plans to supplement the long-delayed project with $250 million in federal stimulus money, is expected to select a best value among the bidders this month.

But the progress will come at a cost for area property owners. Part or all of about 16 Grapevine and Southlake businesses could be removed, including the 80-room Fairfield Inn on Texas 121, according to environmental documents provided by the Transportation Department.

The plans show that up to 10 of those businesses could be bulldozed.

Even more businesses will lose parking spaces, including Sam’s Club, Baylor Regional Medical Center, Academy Sports and Classic Chevrolet, officials said.

Classic Chevrolet will lose 173 parking spaces to make way for a flyover ramp, which will allow motorists on eastbound Texas 114 in Southlake to merge onto southbound Texas 121 and head into Euless or southbound on Texas 360 en route to Arlington without stopping.

New landmarks

Some people believe that the dominant structure in Grapevine is the historic B&D Mills, visible for many miles. Others say it’s the Gaylord Texan Resort and Convention Center. Soon, these arguments will be moot.

The DFW Connector will be 16 miles long, with four decks of ramps and overpasses, and at its peak, near the Dallas/Fort Worth Airport north entrance, the structure will rival the five-deck Interstate 30/Interstate 35W interchange, also known as the Fort Worth Mixmaster, in stature.

The Texas 114/International Parkway interchange north of D/FW Airport will have four layers, similar to the 120-foot-tall High Five at Interstate 635 and U.S. 75 in north Dallas.

Construction could begin this year if the plan gets environmental clearance from the Federal Highway Administration, as expected. The Texas Department of Transportation is reviewing three proposals from developers for design and construction. The cost of the project is estimated at $907 million on federal environmental documents, although state officials predict the cost will top $1 billion.

Hundreds of area residents, city officials and elected officials attended a public hearing last week at the Grapevine Convention Center to learn more about the project. It was the last public meeting required in the environmental study phase.

Land lost

The DFW Connector will widen and improve interchanges for Texas 121, Texas 114, Texas 360, I-635 and surrounding arterial streets. The project will take five years to complete.

The Transportation Department estimates that it will need about 192 acres of right-of-way for the project; it could begin acquisition as soon as this summer.

Hagen Durant, general manager of Classic Chevrolet, said he has been anticipating this for several years. His company will probably have to relocate part of the business to another site to make way for the flyover ramp, which will pass right over the dealership.

Another direct connection from Texas 121 and Texas 360 west to Texas 114 will also have a large flyover ramp near Carrabba’s in Grapevine, at a loss of 11 parking spaces for the restaurant.

In Southlake, the big changes include realignment of the Southlake Boulevard and Gateway Drive bridges. A new flyover ramp will let motorists exit Texas 114 directly onto Southlake Boulevard.

To do that, however, Calico Corners, an interior design store at the corner of Southlake Boulevard and Texas 114, will be displaced.

At its widest point north of Dallas/Fort Worth Airport, Texas 121/114 will have up to 24 lanes, including main lanes, toll lanes and access roads. The westbound main lanes will be seven-wide at one point.

Drivers who intend to travel on Texas 114 straight to Irving will have the option of using managed toll lanes that will be similar to the high-occupancy vehicle lanes on some Dallas highways.

The sheer size of the project is a little scary for Grapevine Mayor William D. Tate.

"We assume we’ll be able to learn how to leave town and find our way back home once it’s built," Tate joked.

Public comments

The public can submit written comments on the proposed project until Friday. They can be mailed to:

Maribel P. Chavez, P.E.

Texas Department of Transportation

P.O. Box 6868

Fort Worth, TX 76115
Read more in the Fort Worth Star Telegram

Groups hit Texas Capitol to oppose spending stimulus money on toll roads

2009-03-05T02:40:00.001-06:00

By DAVE MONTGOMERY - Fort Worth Star Telegram - March 4, 2009
AUSTIN — Beverly Branham’s message to lawmakers was neatly summarized in the four-word placard on her bright red hat: "No Stimulus Toll Road."

The Fort Worth grandmother and scores of like-minded Texans fanned out across the state Capitol on Tuesday, demanding that legislators spend not one penny of federal stimulus money to finance toll roads.

"It’s double taxes," Branham said, "and we’re already tax slaves."

The daylong lobbying mission was organized by several transportation watchdog groups, which contend that using federal stimulus money for toll roads essentially represents a double whammy on their pocketbooks: First, through the federal taxes that finance the huge stimulus package, and second, through the fees they will have to pay at the tollbooth.

"Taxpayers should not have to pay for the roads through repayment of stimulus funds and pay tolls to use the highways," according to a statement from the Arlington-based DFW Regional Concerned Citizens.

Branham and Nina Spears, also of Fort Worth, drove to Austin together. They said they are also concerned about foreign companies’ involvement in toll-road projects and the development of a "NAFTA highway" to funnel international shipping through Texas. The groups outlined their priorities in a midmorning news conference and through visits with lawmakers.

"If anybody grins at us, we walk up and talk to them," Branham said.

The groups also demanded that lawmakers clamp down on the Texas Department of Transportation and scrap any vestiges of Gov. Rick Perry’s Trans-Texas Corridor, which originally called for a $184 billion network of toll roads.

"TxDOT needs to pull back its horns a little bit," said Jimmy Simmons of Waxahachie, a retired engineer at the General Motors plant in Arlington.

Asked whether he thought lawmakers should ban the use of stimulus money for toll roads, Branham responded: "I wish we wouldn’t take any."

Many of the protesters oppose toll roads in general.

"Generation after generation is going to be paying for these roads," said Bruce Burton of Austin. A woman nearby clutched a sign reading, "Texans Against Tolls."
Read more in the Fort Worth Star Telegram

Toll foes, environmentalists urge brakes on stimulus spending for highways

2009-03-03T19:40:00.002-06:00

By Peggy Fikac - Houston Chronicle - March 03, 2009

Toll road opponents and environmentalists today said they want to put the brakes on the Texas Transportation Commission's plans to allocate $1.2 billion in stimulus funds for highway projects Thursday.

They're particularly conccerned about toll projects, which make up $700 million of the total.

"How many times do we have to pay to drive the same stretch of road?" asked Terri Hall, founder of Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom.

One focus of criticism was the Grand Parkway project in Harris County, which one protester's sign dubbed the "Grand Porkway."

Texas Department of Transportation spokesman Chris Lippincott gave the quickest possible "no" when asked whether it's possible that the commission would put off Thursday's vote. The commission had already delayed action from last week after some legislative concern surfaced about the speed with which the agency is acting on stimulus funds.

Lippincott emphasized, as he has before, that the list was developed in coordination with local transportation officials. He said none of the projects is new, and that the commission had been clear that it wanted to spend stimulus money on projects that pooled resources, including revenue from tolls.

He also said that paying a toll is no different from paying to get into a high school football game at a stadium built with tax money.

While the protesters were at the Texas Capitol, Lippincott said, President Obama was making the case at the U.S. Department of Transportation that stimulus money should be spent "immediately and responsibly to keep our economy and our people moving."

The commission last week voted to approve $505 million in maintenance projects for roads and bridges, leaving $1.2 billion in stimulus funds under its purview to be allocated Thursday.
Read more in the Houston Chronicle

Join us for a Grassroots Tax Revolt on Lobby Day March 3!

2009-03-02T08:34:00.002-06:00

Tell your lawmakers face to face that we want our freeways fixed and to keep them FREE of additional toll taxes!
Lobby Day to Stop Toll Roads & the TTC
Tuesday, March 3
Meet at the South Capitol entrance at 9 AM

DFW carpool location announced!
We plan to have our group introduced from the House floor sometime between 10 & 10:30 AM, then you can spend time with your legislators to voice your concerns, do lunch at the Capitol Grill, and hear from some of our "Good Guy" legislators between 3:00 PM - 5:00 PM before heading home.

If you or your group are interested in carpooling, please let us know meeting times and locations so we can publicize it!
It's clear the Legislature is waffling on being tough on TxDOT and bringing much needed resolution on toll road policies and the Trans Texas Corridor. From wanting to raid public employee retirement funds to finance risky, leveraged toll projects, and to hand over our highway system to foreign toll operators, to allowing the conversion of existing freeways into tollways and looking the other way when our wreckless highway department engages in lobbying with taxpayer money, TEXANS must STAND-UP and demand that these irresponsible practices come to an END! We'll have t-shirts for folks to wear (suggested donation $10) so we can communicate our message around the Capitol.

Carpool info

DFW carpool location - David Smith, Coordinator - If you would like to carpool or are in need of a ride, call or email me ASAP as I will either be leaving Monday evening or Tuesday morning early, depending on those coming with me. Plan on meeting at the Corner Market at Lover's Lane and Greenville Avenue where you can leave your cars. Park at your own risk, but it is a well-traveled intersection and a nice area.
Email: davidadriansmith@hotmail.com or Cell # 940-595-185

2

San Antonio carpool location:

Park Hills Baptist Church parking lot at 7:00 AM (just inside Loop 1604 on west side of 281). Sudie Sartor, Coordinator - (210) 488-5412

ACTION ALERT! Email the Transportation Commission in time for their meeting March 5

2009-03-02T08:19:00.002-06:00

email Texas Transportation Commission
Send them this simple message...
No stimulus money for toll roads.
It's a DOUBLE TAX rip-off!

$700 million eyed for toll projects
Grand Parkway's among 21 Texas roadways where money will be spent
By ROSANNA RUIZ - Copyright 2009 Houston Chronicle - Feb. 27, 2009

The 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.

The toll roads — including the Grand Parkway in Harris County — are among 21 major projects up for a vote at next week’s meeting of the Texas Transportation Commission in Austin. The commission had planned to vote on the list this week but delayed its consideration a week after at least one state legislator complained the money was being spent without enough input.

The delay has given opponents an opportunity to organize a lobbying effort aimed at persuading state leaders to withhold stimulus money from toll road projects.

“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.”

TxDOT leaders and transportation planners defend the projects, saying all of them, including the toll roads, are important to their regions and offer tangible economic and mobility benefits.

“I think it’s unfortunate that the discussion about these funds has eclipsed the broader discussion about the state’s transportation needs,” TxDOT spokesman Chris Lippincott said.

The discussion should be on reducing gridlock now, said R

ep. 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.”

More fees for drivers

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.”

The economic stimulus bill does not address toll roads, only that proposed projects satisfy requirements to create jobs and promote economic growth, said Jim Berard, a spokesman for the U.S. House Transportation Committee.

In addition to $181 million for the Grand Parkway, TxDOT’s list includes an additional $50 million for four new ramps connecting the Eastex Freeway and Beltway 8.

The other toll road projects slated for stimulus funds are: $36 million for Texas 550 in Cameron County; $42.5 million for a toll road in Smith County; $144.9 million for Fort Worth’s Southwest Parkway; and $250 million for toll lanes along the Dallas-Fort Worth Connector.

Harris County Commissioner Steve Radack, whose precinct includes Segment E of the Grand Parkway, said the segment satisfies the federal stimulus mandate as a “shovel-ready” project. The Harris County Toll Road Authority would add $16.6 million to the project.

Prioritizing projects

The 15-mile project, he said, potentially will alleviate congestion on U.S. 290.

Citizens Transportation Coalition chairwoman Robin Holzer, who opposed the Commissioners Court’s vote on the Grand Parkway segment, said the state should spend stimulus money on projects other than toll roads that typically are used by a small portion of motorists.

“It’s incomprehensible that TxDOT could think that this is the most important project in the Houston District,” she said.

U.S. 290, she offered, could benefit more from the federal funding.

Radack countered that a planned overhaul of U.S. 290 is not at the appropriate stage for the stimulus funds.

The Grand Parkway and the other projects landed on TxDOT’s project list after extensive planning to identify projects that would improve safety, among other criteria, Lippincott said.

The proposed Grand Parkway would span 180 miles, circling around the Houston area, at a projected cost of $4.8 billion. Segment E calls for a 15-mile, four-lane toll road that would connect the Katy Freeway and U.S. 290 at an estimated cost of $330 million, according to the Harris County Toll Road Authority.

A tolled Segment E could finance other portions of the parkway, proponents say.
Read more in the Houston Chronicle

NTTA overstated assets in 2009 accounting report

2009-03-02T08:11:00.002-06:00

By GORDON DICKSON - Fort Worth Star Telegram - March 1, 2009

Accounting mistake may cost North Texas Tollway Authority

North Texas Tollway Authority officials say they overstated their assets by $105.5 million in a report late last year, an accounting error that could affect the agency’s financial health.

However, officials with the Plano-based agency, say they’ve taken steps to prevent such a mistake in the future. The agency is joining with the Texas Transportation Department to build the Southwest Parkway toll road in Fort Worth this year.

The agency misapplied a Transportation Department grant in August and September, placing it into the agency’s construction fund even though officials hadn’t yet met all the grant conditions, according to a statement released by tollway officials last week. The conditions were satisfied in November.

To provide a clearer financial picture, unaudited monthly reports will be consolidated with audited year-end statements, tollway officials said in the statement.
Read more in the Fort Worth Star Telegram

Tollway board members are eager to find a replacement for ousted Executive Director Jorge Figueredo, who departed in December, said Kenneth Barr, a board member and a former Fort Worth mayor.

In the meantime, Chief Financial Officer Janice Davis is serving as interim director. She is not a candidate for executive director, although several board members have expressed trust in her.

"Janice Davis said she will not put her name on something if it isn’t right. and I respect that," Barr said.

Davis’ career also includes stints at chief financial officer for the city of Atlanta and for the Dallas school district and as finance and budget director for Dallas/Fort Worth Airport.

ACTION ALERT: TX Trans. Commission WORKSHOP Online (Wed) afternoon at 1:30

2009-02-25T10:58:00.002-06:00

By Martha Estes - Feb. 25, 2009
Texas Transportation Commission Workshop (Wed) afternoon Feb. 25 at 1:30.
Fourth on Agenda:
2b. Discussion of the Department's plans for the use of Texas' portion of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act for transportation related activities.
On February 17, 2009, President Obama signed legislation enacting the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act which created an economic stimulus package aimed at bolstering the economy through activities that will create new jobs. One element of this package provides investment in transportation infrastructure projects. TxDOT is working with the Texas Division of the Federal Highway Administration and Texas' metropolitan planning organizations, tolling authorities and transit providers to develop a list of potential projects that would qualify for funding from the stimulus package. This discussion item will allow the commission to discuss the activities TxDOT and our partners have taken thus far and the planned approach we will take to select projects from across the state to recommend to the commission for funding from the program.

Live streaming Video of the Workshop discussion

Action Alert: Stimulus money should not be used for toll roads and bridges

2009-02-25T09:56:00.003-06:00

By Faith Chatham - DFWRCC - Feb. 25, 2009
Lack of funding was the basis used for planning state and federal roads and bridges as toll roads. The Federal Stimulus funding targets infrastructure. Those projects which are planned are most likely to be funded through Stimulus funds. Texas Legislators, US Senators and Congress persons, the Governor and Lt. Governor and President Obama need to hear from you. Let them understand that STIMULUS MONEY SHOULD NOT BE USED ON TOLL PROJECTS OR PRIVATE PUBLIC PARTNERSHIP HIGHWAY PROJECTS.

If we do not speak out now, we'll pay gas tax, pay tolls and pay back the stimulus money. We'll face TRIPLE TAXATION if we don't demand that project planned as toll projects be revised to non toll roads and bridges.

Please take this opportunity to demand what is best for you, your neighbors, and future generations.

For Whom the Toll Bells - The North Texas Tollway Authority exacts a stiff price for those who drive willy-nilly on its highways

2009-02-05T12:48:00.002-06:00

By Jim Schutze - Dallas Observer - January 14, 2009

Certain things you can do that might turn out very badly for you. Borrowing money from the Mafia, for example. Posing naked for a photographer who is a stranger.

The only sure way to avoid getting one of the tollway authority's trick bills for several hundred dollars is to have a lawyer ride with you.-MORREY TAYLOR

But who worries about driving down a toll road? I can tell you who should: You!

Over the last several years I have received numerous phone calls, letters and e-mails from people complaining that they have been hit with huge, totally unexpected bills for unpaid tolls and associated fines.

For a long time, I brushed these aside. I thought, "Well, you know, people should pay their tolls."

But most of the people calling me don't sound like folks who regularly skip on restaurant tabs or jump over turnstiles. I made up my mind a few weeks ago that the next time I got one of these complaints, I would stop whatever I was doing and take a look. I didn't have long to wait. On a Monday morning I found a phone message from Rick Johns, a probation officer in Tarrant County.

Johns had just received a bill from the North Texas Tollway Authority for $337 for four trips on the President George Bush Turnpike, which runs from near the D/FW Airport east to the vicinity of Rowlett on Lake Ray Hubbard.

For the first trip, which he made a year and a half ago, he was charged at a rate of $3 in tolls and $100 in "administrative fees." The second trip, made about a year ago, was billed at $3 in tolls and $75 in fees. Another cruise down the PGBT the following day cost him $2 in tolls and 50 bucks in fees.

The most recent trip, his most expensive, was made last May and billed at $4 in tolls and $100 in fees.

According to Johns, this statement was the first notification of any kind telling him he owed the NTTA money. His claim—that this was a first notice—was backed up by the notice itself, of which he gave me a copy, and by the NTTA's own description of its billing practices when I called them. The NTTA didn't comment on Johns' case specifically.

Before I even venture into the question of the billing practices, let's you and I see if we can figure out how a normal, law-abiding citizen—a parole officer in this case—gets behind the eight-ball to the tune of three C-notes in unpaid toll road fees.

Johns drives to the Dallas side of the metropolitan area for his son's baseball games. He used to drive on the State Highway 121 tollway between Coppell and Lewisville.

There are no tollbooths on 121. Therefore it is not possible to pay your tolls as you go. Cameras along the way take pictures of you as you pass. If you do not have an electronic TollTag on your windshield connected to a credit card, the NTTA bills you by mail for the amount of your tolls.

Johns didn't have a Dallas-area TollTag. Didn't want one. Was happy to pay by mail. Did so. He even thought mistakenly that he was paying a little extra and didn't mind.

"I was under the impression that the toll may have been even 25 cents higher per toll by not stopping and paying, and I didn't have a problem with that."

He says he paid those bills when he got them. Never had a problem. So where did he do wrong? He started driving on another NTTA toll road—the President George Bush Turnpike. There, the rules are different.

As explained to me by NTTA spokeswoman Sherita Coffelt, the difference is that the PGBT does have tollbooths, while the 121 tollway does not. Coffelt said that wherever there are tollbooths, a motorist who does not have a TollTag must stop and pay cash. Where there are no tollbooths, a motorist does not have to stop and pay cash.

When a motorist is not required to stop and pay cash, he will be billed for the amount of his toll only. When he is required to stop and pay cash but does not, he's a toll jumper. He will be billed for the amount of his toll plus a $25 penalty called an "administrative fee."

No signs along the road warn motorists of this difference. Coffelt told me it's the motorist's obligation to know the rules.

Each skipped toll station incurs a new $25 administrative fee. On his jaunt down the PGBT last May, Johns passed by four toll stations, each one of which took a picture of his license plate and billed him for a $1 toll plus a $25 administrative fee. So four times $26 amounted to a bill for $104, a tab he racked up for 33 minutes of driving.

But wait. We're not done with the different rules on how to pay your toll. There is a third rule. On the Dallas North Tollway, you can pay cash, so if you don't have a TollTag you must pay cash, and if you don't pay cash you'll be billed for the tolls plus the $25 fees. But you can't pay cash.

Say what?

The Dallas North Tollway is a road where you can pay cash, so you have to pay cash, but if you enter the Dallas North Tollway at the main plaza at Wycliff close to downtown, you will notice that you can't pay cash. There are no tollbooths at Wycliff.
Coffelt explained to me that the absence of cash-taking booths at the main entrance to the Dallas North Tollway is just kind of an exception. The Dallas North Tollway is definitely a must-pay-cash toll road except when you get on it, when it is a can't-pay-cash toll road. But that doesn't last; later down the road you have to pay cash.

Maybe you better take notes.

If you enter at Wycliff and you don't have a TollTag and you don't pay cash because you can't pay cash, you will be billed only for the amount of your tolls. Maybe.

If you keep driving, and maybe you think this is a road where you don't have to pay cash because that's what it was when you got on, but you pass another toll plaza farther north at say, Keller-Springs Road where you can pay cash, but you decide not to pay cash because you have been lulled into thinking you don't have to pay cash, this is what you must do next:

Pull over to the shoulder immediately.

Exit the vehicle.

Put your head between your legs.

Kiss your ass good-bye.

You have just become a son-of-a-bitch, toll-jumping, miscreant fool, and you are about to feel the full weight of the law on your no-good, crime-prone head.

Well, you might think, maybe I make that mistake one time. They let me know. I take my medicine, pay my toll plus my 25 bucks. Man, I'll sure never make that mistake again!

Not so fast, Kemo Sabe. In Johns' case, for example, he had no idea he was doing anything wrong until he was on the tab for $337. He told me he certainly would have figured out a smarter way to behave had he known what was going on at the get-go.

"I get on George Bush, which I assume is the same deal as 121, and obviously if I had known this—a $25 administrative fee per tollbooth—I mean, good grief, I would have made other arrangements."

I asked Coffelt why people don't get billed or notified right away, the first time they hit the buzzer, so that they won't keep making the same mistake. She said the NTTA wants to spare people the annoyance of being billed every time they have a two-bit toll.

"We're not sending out a 40-cent bill, and then you end up paying 42 cents for postage, because what person would want to write a check for 40 cents. So we save up a couple of transactions."

I said I understood about the normal tolls, but did the agency try to let people know the first time they made a mistake and racked up a $25 administrative fee? She said no. They save up those too.

"We will save it, and you may get two, three transactions with $25 fees on it, so yes, we do save those."

Problem. Johns, indeed, had only four toll road trips on his first bill. But those trips took place over an 18-month period. And because the system hits him with a separate $25 fee every time he ticks past another camera, his total administrative fees for those four trips came to $325. The first trip alone, a year and a half ago, cost him $100 in fees.

They couldn't have given him a heads-up a year and a half ago?

I asked Coffelt how much the agency collects in administrative fees and fines. Apparently that is a really tough question to answer. She said she would have to get back to me.

I did not hear from her before the deadline for this story, but I did the best I could on my own. I looked online at the NTTA's annual financial statements.

According to the NTTA's 2007 financial statement, it collected $4.4 million that year in administrative fees "for collection of tolls from toll violators [the bastards]," representing 2.1 percent of its total income.

Note to reader: I added "the bastards."

What I found more interesting was this: Between 2001 and 2007, the agency's toll revenues grew by 89 percent. In that same period, its revenues for "administrative fees, parking transaction fees, statement fees and miscellaneous charges" grew by 356 percent.

So I guess if you are the bright person at the NTTA in charge of squeezing money out of people with non-toll fees, right about now you've got a big gold star over your name.

While they're at it, the NTTA should set up a special tollbooth just for people who get really behind on their administrative fees. Deadbeats would be required to park their cars and come inside.

There should be some old pinball machines in there and a couple guys in zoot suits smoking cigars, one of them cleaning his fingernails with a switchblade. They might say something like, "Pal, you gotta lotta administrative fees youse owes us. We'd like to settle this peaceful."

They might as well be honest about the type of operation they're running.

Read More in the Dallas Observer

For some Dallas-area legislators, donations fund the good life

2009-02-02T12:25:00.003-06:00

By EMILY RAMSHAW and MARCUS FUNK - The Dallas Morning News - Sunday, February 1, 2009

Read more

AUSTIN – Luxury car payments and private airplanes. Five-star hotels and exotic resort stays. Upscale condos, gym memberships and maid service.

They're just some of the ways North Texas lawmakers spend their campaign donations.

Some of this money, which is designed to fund runs for office, comes from individual supporters; the rest comes from special interest groups that have a stake in legislation. But Texas lawmakers are permitted to use the contributions for other expenses associated with holding elected office.

What qualifies is often subject to debate. A Dallas Morning News review of two years' worth of North Texas elected officials' spending habits shows their expenditures run the gamut from bare-bones to lavish, largely depending on how much they raise.

North Texas lawmakers say their spending is justified because of the personal and professional sacrifices they make to hold office. Lawmakers are paid $600 a month, plus a $128 personal allowance every day they're in session,

"It's a very expensive obligation – we have to live in Austin, we have to travel throughout our districts," said Sen. Florence Shapiro, R-Plano, who has used her contributions to fund car lease payments to Mercedes Benz and conference stays at the Ritz Carlton Palm Beach, the Venetian in Las Vegas, a Puerto Rican resort and the Hay-Adams, a luxury hotel in Washington, D.C.

"Otherwise, the only people who could afford to be elected would be the wealthiest of the wealthy."

Critics: slush funds

But watchdogs say the campaign accounts have effectively become lawmaker slush funds, where special interest groups can give unlimited contributions to augment elected officials' lifestyles. In the last two years, 34 percent of North Texas lawmakers' total spending – roughly $3.4 million out of nearly $10 million total – has gone to fund things beyond traditional campaigns, according to The News' analysis.

In a review two years ago that included only Dallas-area lawmakers, The News found that nearly half of their spending went to noncampaign expenditures.

"They're using the lobby's money to enhance their lifestyles, a perk that is technically legal but a clear conflict of interest," said Craig McDonald, executive director of Texans for Public Justice, which tracks the influence of money in state politics. "There ought to be a better wall between campaign contributions and what appear to be personal expenditures."

Combined, 36 North Texas lawmakers have spent nearly $560,000 on travel and entertainment, $470,000 on Austin living expenses and $290,000 on food since 2007. The bulk of their noncampaign spending – just over $2 million – was on charitable donations, gifts and campaign contributions, many of them to one another.

It's common for officials at all levels who don't face serious competition for re-election to donate to colleagues, often to help a fellow party member or to try to secure future support from them.

Of the five highest North Texas spenders, three are senators and two are House members, and all but one is Republican. Only one had a highly competitive race in the last election, which could have required unusually high expenditures.

Of the five lowest-spending North Texas lawmakers, three are Republicans and two are Democrats. All are House members.

Sen. John Carona, R-Dallas, spent more than $1 million in the last two years, more than any other North Texas lawmaker. The Senate transportation chairman's campaign reimbursed his property-management company nearly $62,000 for using the company's corporate jet for travel between Austin and Dallas – and other states where his firm has offices.

"The only expenses that we charge to the campaign are related to my service here in office," Carona said.

Carona's airplane costs were second only to Sen. Craig Estes, R-Wichita Falls, who spent nearly $95,000 on fuel and fees for a prop plane he leases. Estes, whose district includes parts of Denton and Collin counties, said that ground travel from his district to Austin is time-consuming and that the lack of direct flights means flying commercial is as tedious as driving.

"I'm a little envious of my colleagues in Amarillo and El Paso, since Southwest flies there straight from Austin every day," he said

.

Questions have been raised about lawmakers' use of private airplanes in the past. Between 1996 and 2004, the Texas Republican Party repeatedly attacked former Democratic House Speaker Pete Laney for using campaign funds to pay for his own airplane, once filing a Texas Ethics Commission complaint against him. Laney, whose district was in West Texas, was never cited for it.

Hans Klingler, spokesman for the state Republican Party, said if the ethics commission is OK with it, the party is, too.

"We always hope they put taxpayer interests first, and it sounds like both of these people, along with Speaker Laney, did that," said Klingler, who did not work for the party then.

Common practice

Using campaign funds to pay for other expenses is a common practice across the country, though the level varies from state to state, said Nick Nyhart, president of the nonprofit group Public Campaigns, which works to reduce the role of special interest money in politics.

In some states, lawmakers use the funds to sponsor Little League teams and community events. In the most severe cases, Nyhart said, lawmakers have used the campaign accounts to get around gift-giving rules and other ethics laws.

"The money can help purchase you a lifestyle above and beyond what you can afford were you not a lawmaker," Nyhart said.

Rep. Dan Branch, R-Dallas, and Sen. Jane Nelson, R-Lewisville, were two of the most generous donors – contributing $343,000 and $165,000, respectively, to the campaigns of their colleagues and to charitable causes across North Texas.

Branch attributed most of his spending – which totaled nearly $800,000 over the last two years – to having a Democratic challenger for his seat that "we took really seriously." But he argued that because of relatively low pay, it's appropriate for them to use their officeholder accounts for business purposes.

"There are a lot of sacrifices being made to be here," Branch said. "That said, there are laws set out for what's appropriate. Each member needs to be thoughtful about what these appropriate uses are."

For Sen. Chris Harris, R-Fort Worth, these uses include spending more than $15,000 on rental apartments for himself and his staff in Austin, and using campaign funds to cover his renters and auto insurance, his Sirius satellite radio and his maid service. He put a $12,000 down payment on a car at Park Place Lexus, then made more than $8,500 in lease payments.

In addition to car payments and luxury hotel stays totaling more than $13,000, Shapiro spent nearly $10,000 on Austin apartment rent, plus more than $2,000 on DirecTV and home cleaning services. Shapiro says she pays for half of her expenses out of pocket and funds the other half with her campaign account.

"The people who give us money recognize what it's going for and know that we're citizen legislators," she said.

Among other lawmakers' expenditures:

•Rep. Burt Solomons, R-Carrollton, spent more than $20,000 on rent for his Austin apartment, plus more than $4,500 on cable TV and cleaning service.

•Sen. Royce West, D-Dallas, was the top-spending Democrat, using campaign funds to make nearly $16,000 in car payments.

•Rep. Todd Smith, R-Euless, spent nearly $15,000 on Austin living expenses, including rental furniture, TV repairs, insurance, carpet cleaning and a gym membership.

•Sen. Bob Deuell, R-Greenville, spent more than $27,000 on car lease payments, auto insurance and repairs. He also spent nearly $18,000 on hotel stays. He said logistics getting to and from Austin, as well as travel within his own district, make up the bulk of his noncampaign-related expenses.

"If anybody thinks I'm making money out of this, they can call my
accountant," said Deuell, a physician. "I lose a lot of money every year
as a senator, as do a lot of other folks."

The Dallas Morning News surveyed campaign finance records from 36 lawmakers in Dallas, Tarrant, Rockwall, Denton, Collin and Ellis counties to measure campaign-related and noncampaign-related spending over the last two years. The study classified anything related to pursuing or supplying an office as "campaign spending" – everything from campaign mailers to office fax machines. All other expenses were divided into four categories: food, often for meetings; travel and
entertainment, including gasoline charges; gifts and political contributions, including donations to colleagues and local civic groups; and Austin living expenses, including apartment rent and utilities. The six North Texas lawmakers elected for the first time in 2008 had very few noncampaign expenses and were excluded from this survey.

Also Online:

Lawmaker living expenditures (.pdf)
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/img/02-09/0201living1.pdf

Lawmaker gifts, donations and dues expenditures (.pdf)
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/img/02-09/0201gifts1.pdf

Lawmaker travel and entertainment expenditures (.pdf)
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/img/02-09/0201travel1.pdf

Lawmaker food expenditures (.pdf)
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/img/02-09/0201food1.pdf

Texas Ethics Commission
http://www.ethics.state.tx.us/

Blog:
http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/

Video: Emissions Created From Hydraulic Fracture of Barnett Shale Gas Well

2009-01-31T18:26:00.001-06:00

Part of the reason the EPA is being sued.

Texas Senate Committees

2009-01-31T16:18:00.000-06:00

Administration Committee

1. Tommy Williams, R-The Woodlands, chairman (new member)
2. Carlos Uresti, D-San Antonio, vice chairman
3. Steve Ogden, R-Bryan (new)
4. Florence Shapiro, R-Plano
5. Jeff Wentworth, R-San Antonio
6. John Whitmire, D-Houston
7. Judith Zaffirini, D-Laredo

Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee (new, was a subcommittee)

1. Craig Estes, R-Wichita Falls, chairman
2. Carlos Uresti, vice chairman (new, was member of subcommittee)
3. Glenn Hegar, R-Katy
4. Juan Hinojosa, D-McAllen
5. Mike Jackson, R-La Porte

Business and Commerce Committee

1. Troy Fraser, R-Horseshoe Bay, chairman
2. Chris Harris, R-Arlington, vice chairman
3. Kip Averitt, R-Waco
4. Kevin Eltife, R-Tyler
5. Mike Jackson, R-La Porte (new)
6. Eddie Lucio, D-Brownsville
7. Leticia Van de Putte, D-San Antonio
8. Kirk Watson, D-Austin

Criminal Justice Committee

1. John Whitmire, D-Houston, chairman
2. Kel Seliger, R-Amarillo, vice chairman
3. John Carona, R-Dallas (new)
4. Rodney Ellis, D-Houston
5. Glenn Hegar, R-Katy
6. Juan Hinojosa, D-McAllen
7. Dan Patrick, R-Houston (new)

Economic Development Committee (new, was a subcommittee)

1. Chris Harris, R-Arlington, chairman (new)
2. Kevin Eltife, R-Tyler, vice chair (new)
3. Robert Deuell, R-Greenville (new)
4. Kirk Watson, D-Austin
5. Judith Zaffirini, D-Laredo (new)

Education Committee

1. Florence Shapiro, R-Plano, chair
2. Dan Patrick, R-Houston, vice chairman (new)
3. Kip Averitt, R-Waco
4. Wendy Davis, D-Fort Worth (new)
5. Mario Gallegos, D-Houston (new)
6. Steve Ogden, R-Bryan
7. Leticia Van de Putte, D-San Antonio
8. Royce West, D-Dallas
9. Tommy Williams, R-The Woodlands

Finance Committee

1. Steve Ogden, R-Bryan, chairman
2. Juan Hinojosa, D-McAllen, vice chairman (new)
3. Kip Averitt, R-Waco
4. Robert Deuell, R-Greenville
5. Robert Duncan, R-Lubbock
6. Kevin Eltife, R-Tyler
7. Chris Harris, R-Arlington (new)
8. Eddie Lucio, D-Brownsville
9. Jane Nelson, R-Lewisville
10. Kel Seliger, R-Amarillo (new)
11. Florence Shapiro, R-Plano
12. Royce West, D-Dallas
13. John Whitmire, D-Houston
14. Tommy Williams, R-The Woodlands
15. Judith Zaffirini, D-Laredo

Government Organization Committee

1. Rodney Ellis, D-Houston, chairman
2. Glenn Hegar, R-Katy, vice chairman
3. Joan Huffman, R-Houston (new)
4. Eddie Lucio, D-Brownsville (new)
5. Jane Nelson, R-Lewisville
6. Steve Ogden, R-Bryan (new)
7. John Whitmire, D-Houston

Health and Human Services Committee

1. Jane Nelson, R-Lewisville, chair
2. Robert Deuell, R-Greenville, vice chair
3. Joan Huffman, R-Houston (new)
4. Robert Nichols, R-Jacksonville
5. Dan Patrick, R-Houston
6. Eliot Shapleigh, D-El Paso
7. Carlos Uresti, D-San Antonio
8. Royce West, D-Dallas
9. Judith Zaffirini, D-Laredo

Higher Education Committee (new, was a subcommittee)

1. Judith Zaffirini, D-Laredo, chair
2. Dan Patrick, R-Houston, vice chairman (new, was member of subcommittee)
3. Kip Averitt, R-Waco
4. Robert Duncan, R-Lubbock (new)
5. Royce West, D-Dallas

Intergovernmental Relations Committee

1. Royce West, D-Dallas, chairman
2. Robert Nichols, R-Jacksonville
3. Mario Gallegos, D-Houston
4. Dan Patrick, R-Houston
5. Jeff Wentworth, R-San Antonio

Subcommittee on Flooding and Evacuations

1. Mario Gallegos, D-Houston, chairman
2. Robert Nichols, R-Jacksonville
3. Dan Patrick, R-Houston

International Relations and Trade

1. Eddie Lucio, D-Brownsville, chairman
2. Kel Seliger, R-Amarillo, vice chairman (new)
3. Wendy Davis, D-Fort Worth (new)
4. Craig Estes, R-Wichita Falls
5. Troy Fraser, R-Horseshoe Bay
6. Mario Gallegos, D-Houston
7. Tommy Williams, R-The Woodlands (new)

Jurisprudence Committee

1. Jeff Wentworth, R-San Antonio, chairman
2. Mario Gallegos, D-Houston, vice chairman (new)
3. John Carona, R-Dallas
4. Robert Duncan, R-Lubbock
5. Chris Harris, R-Arlington
6. Juan Hinojosa, D-McAllen
7. Kirk Watson, D-Austin

Natural Resources

1. Kip Averitt, R-Waco, chairman
2. Craig Estes, R-Wichita Falls, vice chairman
3. Robert Deuell, R-Greenville
4. Robert Duncan, R-Lubbock
5. Kevin Eltife, R-Tyler
6. Troy Fraser, R-Horseshoe Bay (new)
7. Glenn Hegar, R-Katy
8. Juan Hinojosa, D-McAllen
9. Mike Jackson, R-LaPorte
10. Kel Seliger, R-Amarillo
11. Carlos Uresti, D-San Antonio

Nominations Committee

1. Mike Jackson, R-La Porte, chairman
2. Kevin Eltife, R-Tyler, vice chairman
3. Glenn Hegar, R-Katy
4. Jane Nelson, R-Lewisville
5. Robert Nichols, R-Jacksonville
6. Eliot Shapleigh, D-El Paso
7. Kirk Watson, D-Austin

State Affairs Committee

1. Robert Duncan, R-Lubbock, chairman
2. Robert Deuell, R-Greenville, vice chairman (new)
3. John Carona, R-Dallas
4. Rodney Ellis, D-Houston
5. Troy Fraser, R-Horseshoe Bay
6. Chris Harris, R-Arlington
7. Mike Jackson, R-La Porte
8. Eddie Lucio, D-Brownsville
9. Leticia Van de Putte, D-San Antonio

Transportation and Homeland Security

1. John Carona, R-Dallas, chairman
2. Kirk Watson, D-Austin, vice chairman
3. Wendy Davis, D-Fort Worth (new)
4. Rodney Ellis, D-Houston
5. Joaan Huffman, R-Houston (new)
6. Robert Nichols, R-Jacksonville
7. Florence Shapiro, R-Plano
8. Eliot Shapleigh, D-El Paso
9. Jeff Wentworth, R-San Antonio

Veterans Affairs and Military Installations

1. Leticia Van de Putte, D-San Antonio, chair
2. Eliot Shapleigh, D-El Paso, vice chair
3. Wendy Davis, D-Fort Worth (new)
4. Craig Estes, R-Wichita Falls
5. Joan Huffman, R-Houston (new)

Subcommittee on Base Realignment and Closure

1. Eliot Shapleigh, D-El Paso, chairman
2. Craig Estes, R-Wichita Falls
3. Joan Huffman, R-Houston (new)

If you live in D/FW and drink water

2009-01-18T22:16:00.000-06:00

You might want to ask the Texas Railroad Commission this question:

WHERE DID THE WATER GO?

TTC Dead -- New Plan announced

2009-01-06T15:11:00.004-06:00

TxDOT - For Immediate Release - January 6, 2009

TxDOT Announces Updated Vision for Trans-Texas Corridor New document describes changes to original development plans, responds to public concern

AUSTIN - Before approximately 1,200 attendees at the fourth annual Texas Transportation Forum Tuesday, Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) Executive Director Amadeo Saenz unveiled Innovative Connectivity in Texas|Vision 2009, outlining updated guidelines for development of the Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC). The document describes the transformation of the original TTC vision, appropriately altered with regard to corridor width, transportation mode, use of existing facilities, timeline for development, and level of involvement of local officials and citizens in planning major corridor facilities in their communities.

"Texans have spoken, and we've been listening," said Saenz. "Citizens across the state have had good ideas about how Texas roads can better serve Texas communities. I believe this transformed vision for the TTC and other major corridor development goes a long way toward addressing the concerns we've heard over the past several years."

TxDOT agrees with many of the recommendations of the I-35 and I-69 Corridor Advisory Committees, citizen advisory groups created to participate in planning transportation projects along the two TTC project corridors already under way. Major corridor projects will now be comprised of several small segments closer to 600 feet wide and will no longer be called the Trans-Texas Corridor. Instead, the department will use the highway numbers originally associated with each segment, such as I-69, SH 130 and Loop 9. In addition, TxDOT will seek guidance from Corridor Segment Advisory Committees, comprised of citizens from affected communities along each corridor segment, to design and build facilities that meet the needs of the region, whether that includes road, freight rail, commuter rail and so on.

"I'm pleased with the level of public involvement called for in this document," added Saenz. "I'm hopeful that, working together, we'll develop a corridor that serves both the economic interests of the state and the needs of each individual community."

The original vision for the TTC, outlined in Crossroads of the Americas: Trans-Texas Corridor Plan, called for a corridor of up to 1,200 feet in width that would allow for several modes of transportation in addition to utility transmission facilities. Since the concept was publicly introduced in 2002, communities along the TTC-35 and I-69/TTC study areas have frequently voiced concerns over the corridor width, and viewed the idea as a one-size-fits-all concept, inappropriate for a
state as diverse as Texas.

The corridors are still in early phases of development. As each corridor continues to undergo federal environmental impact studies, the public will play a significant role in shaping the development and path of the roadway. These environmental impact studies and input received from public participation in Corridor Segment Advisory Committees, Corridor Advisory Committees and town hall meetings will eventually determine the final route alignment to satisfy the state’s
transportation needs.

View the complete document

For more information contact TxDOT Government and Public Affairs Division at (512)463-6086

Sludge Spill Worse Than Initial Reports. MUCH WORSE

2008-12-26T22:18:00.000-06:00

The Tennessee ~~clean~~ coal by product sludge pit spill is 3 TIMES worse than the initial reports

DRAFT SUMMARY - Sunset Commission Decisions on the Texas Department of Transportation

2008-12-26T19:42:00.002-06:00

Sunset Decision Meeting – December 16, 2008

Issue 1 – TxDOT Governance and Oversight

1.1 Abolish the Texas Transportation Commission and replace it with an appointed Commissioner of Transportation. The Commissioner must be experienced and skilled in transportation planning, development, financing, construction, and maintenance, or have appropriate finance or management experience. A person is not eligible to be appointed or serve as the Commissioner if the person has served in Texas Legislature in the previous 10 years.

1.2 Establish a Transportation Legislative Oversight Committee to provide necessary oversight of the Department and the State’s transportation system.

Modification to Recommendation 1.2

Authorize the Transportation Legislative Oversight Committee to contract with an outside management consulting firm independent of TxDOT to restructure; recommend an effective and efficient organization structure, appropriate staffing levels based upon work loads; review TxDOT’s financial condition and business practices; evaluate the effectiveness of the agency’s transportation planning and programming processes; and coordinate with the Legislative Budget Board, State Auditor’s Office, and the agency’s internal efforts to minimize the duplication of efforts, and to plan, contract and build in the most cost effective and timely manner. The implementation of these recommendations will be overseen by the Legislative Oversight Committee, with the goal of reducing staff, streamlining processes, and transitioning the agency into an entity with greater efficiency, transparency, and accountability.

The primary functions of the auditing entity would include, but not be limited to:

♦ Evaluating TxDOT’s financial condition and business practices;

♦ Evaluating TxDOT’s administrative practices and performance, including statewide transportation planning, the agency’s relationship with Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), how the agency’s district and central offices perform their functions, and the need for standardization of the agency’s operations across the state;

♦ Evaluating the current guidelines of MPOs and all other transportation entities within the state involved with project delivery and/or transportation policy by identifying duplicative practices and providing recommendations for better efficiency and transparency;

♦ Identifying ways to streamline all processes/procedures of policy implementations of the agency, most notably the environmental process;

♦ Examining and evaluating the use and benefits of performance-based maintenance contracting at TxDOT;

♦ Examining and presenting recommendations on how to maximize TxDOT’s use of multi-modal solutions;

♦ Analyzing TxDOT’s compliance with applicable laws and legislative intent;

♦ Examining the efficient use of TxDOT’s available funding, personnel, equipment, and office space;

♦ Recommending appropriate performance measurements for each major function including comparisons to best practices;

♦ Evaluating establishing in statute the state pavement quality goal as having 85 percent of state roads being in good or better condition; and

♦ Considering significantly expanding utilization of the private sector for planning, design, and delivery of projects and a commitment to excellence in project and program management.

Require the Transportation Legislative Oversight Committee to assess TxDOT’s progress in implementing the management consultant and audit recommendations and to report the status of TxDOT’s implementation efforts to the Senate Finance Committee and House Appropriations Committee to be considered when establishing TxDOT’s budget as part of the appropriations process.

DFWRCC ENDORSES THREE CANDIDATES IN GENERAL ELECTION

2008-10-21T11:15:00.009-06:00

By Faith Chatham - DFWRCC- Oct. 21, 2008

DFWRCC rarely endorses candidates. However this year all three co-founders of DFWRCC voted to endorse three candidates. These individuals have been selected because of their comprehension of the complexities of public private partnership toll roads and the averse impact these project will have in the near future and for years in the future to the North Texas economy.

JERRY LEE PHILLIPS FOR TARRANT COUNTY COMMISSIONER, PCT. 3
In Tarrant County, civic activist Jerry Lee Phillips is challenging Gary Fickes for County Commissioner. The northern part of Tarrant County suffers from discrimination by TxDOT and transportation planners at the RTC in appropriating their fair share of gas tax dollars and other public transporation financing to keeping pace with the escalation of population in that region. One of the newer members of the Tarrant County Commissioners' Court, Mr. Fickes understands the importance of combatting gridlock, but has not fought vigorously to demand cost effective public solutions to that region's transportation needs. We endorse challenger Jerry Lee Phillips because he grasps the impact of State and Tarrant County officials decisions to abandon traditional infrastructure financing for the more costly tolled alternatives.

The tolled HOV expansion of existing roads in that region will not solve the transportation problems confronting that district. The current plans are merely a bandaide -- and a very costly one to the pocketbooks of citizens who depend on state highways for commuting. Jerry Lee Phillips is one of the more intelligent candidates who has run for the Tarrant County Commissioners Court in decades. He brings business skill, educational training, and a solid grasp of public administration. He is not a "court house insider" and brings a fresh perspective to county administration. He will demand more accountability by the JPS Hospital system. Jerry Lee Phillips says: “It’s time that tough questions be asked in relationship to the stewardship of taxpayer dollars. The Commissioners Court must seize the moment and ask why JPS executives are getting richer while JPS hospital staff are underpaid in relation to their dedication to patient care. Why are JPS executives getting richer while JPS hospital is in desperate need of upgrades and refurbishing?”

Jerry Lee Phillips is running one of the more vigorous challenger campaigns for public office in the DFW metroplex.

He is a sound voice who will represent residents of the district in confronting "the good ole boy engrained and entrenched fraternity" of contractors, road planners and bought and paid for politicans.

RAIN MIMMS FOR STATE SENATE

Attorney Rain Mimms is challenging Senator John Carona for Texas Senate Seat 16. Senator Carona, as chair of the Senate Transportation and Homeland Security Committee, allowed citizens to speak out against the Trans Texas Corridor. Without his support, it would have been much more difficult for Texans to confront the powerful Texas Transportation Commission and TxDOT. However, he did not act to defeat the exemption on the 2-year moratorium on toll roads in the DFW metroplex. Like most incumbents, he caved to Governor Perry when the "going got really tough."

His involvement with home mortgages during the financial crisis creates conflicts of interest.

Rain Mimms brings an intelligent, responsive, educated alternative for State Senate District Voters. With a few exceptions (such as Senator Lois Kolkhorst and Senator Florence Shapiro) Republican incubent Texas Senators from this region refused to represent the people's best interest by rejecting the market value priced public private toll state highway give-away promoted by Rick Perry and his Texas Transportation Commission. Some incumbent Democrats joined with Perry in the great Texas infrastructure give-away and deserve to be booted out of the Senate also. In this region, the race where there is a highly qualified challenger who sincerely represents the welfare of ordinary working men and women in this district and state is Senate District 16.

Senator Carona deserves to be thanked for the postive things he has brought to this State. Rain Mimms deserves the opportunity to serve the people. We urge voters in Senate District 16 to vote for challenger Rain Mimms.

TOM LOVE FOR U.S. HOUSE DISTRICT 24

Tom Love is challenging incumbent Representative Kenny Marchant for U.S. House seat 24. Rep. Marchant, low on the house senority list, is tired and discouraged. He has written few bills and gotten little accomplished. His staff has not been exceptional in serving his constituents. At best, his tenure in the house can only be described as lack-luster. Rep. Marchant's "No" vote on regulating the sub-prime mortage industry contributed to the current financial melt-down. In 2007 he voted against allowing stockholder to vote on executive compensation. He voted "no" on protecting whistleblowers from employer recrimination.

Rep. Marchant has not supported mass transit despite this region's poor air quality and transportation gridlock. In 2006 he voted "no" on adding $214M to $900M AMTRAK to bring it up to previous year's funding.

In 2005 he voted "yes" on implementing CAFTA (Central American Free Trade). He also voted to make the Patriot Act permanent.

On healthcare, Rep. Marchant voted "no" on adding 2 to 4 million children to the SCHIP eligibility and voted "no" on requiring negotation for prescription prices on Medicare Part D.

Tom Love differs with Senator Marchant on all these votes. It is time to give another Texan opportunity to serve in the U.S. Congress.

All three founders of DFWRCC know challenger Tom Love. We know that his campaign rhetoric about representing the ordinary working man and woman is genuine. We know that his support for Universal Health Care predates his declaration for office. He is passionate about combating the trend of moving American manufacturing offshore. He will fight to reverse policies which reward companies for registering their businesses in off-shore tax sheltered corporations.

Tom Love also understand the negative impact of tolling public highways. He will fight to bring adequate funding to the DFW Region so that we can maintain existing federally funded highways and bridges and expand capacity without tolls. We urge voters to give Tom Love opportunity to serve them in the U.S. Congress.

The Guys From ‘Government Sachs’

2008-10-21T11:04:00.004-06:00

By JULIE CRESWELL and BEN WHITE -
The New York Times - October 17, 2008
[DFWRCC EDITOR NOTE: This story is posted here because Goldman Sachs is a player in the toll road financial market and in financing other public and private infrastructure projects. The Financial Crisis reaches to every segment of our community.]
CLICK HERE TO SEE PHOTO OF TREASURY FACES WHO ARE FORMERLY FROM GOLDMAN SACHS.

Treasury faces,Steve Shafran (formerly of Goldman), Kendrick Wilson III (ditto), Henry Paulson Jr. (you guessed it), Edward Forst (yep) and Neel Kashkari (see a trend?).

THIS summer, when the Treasury secretary, Henry M. Paulson Jr., sought help navigating the Wall Street meltdown, he turned to his old firm, Goldman Sachs, snagging a handful of former bankers and other experts in corporate restructurings.

In September, after the government bailed out the American International Group, the faltering insurance giant, for $85 billion, Mr. Paulson helped select a director from Goldman’s own board to lead A.I.G.

And earlier this month, when Mr. Paulson needed someone to oversee the government’s proposed $700 billion bailout fund, he again recruited someone with a Goldman pedigree, giving the post to a 35-year-old former investment banker who, before coming to the Treasury Department, had little background in housing finance.

Indeed, Goldman’s presence in the department and around the federal response to the financial crisis is so ubiquitous that other bankers and competitors have given the star-studded firm a new nickname: Government Sachs.

The power and influence that Goldman wields at the nexus of politics and finance is no accident. Long regarded as the savviest and most admired firm among the ranks — now decimated — of Wall Street investment banks, it has a history and culture of encouraging its partners to take leadership roles in public service.

It is a widely held view within the bank that no matter how much money you pile up, you are not a true Goldman star until you make your mark in the political sphere. While Goldman sees this as little more than giving back to the financial world, outside executives and analysts wonder about potential conflicts of interest presented by the firm’s unique perch.

They note that decisions that Mr. Paulson and other Goldman alumni make at Treasury directly affect the firm’s own fortunes. They also question why Goldman, which with other firms may have helped fuel the financial crisis through the use of exotic securities, has such a strong hand in trying to resolve the problem.

The very scale of the financial calamity and the historic government response to it have spawned a host of other questions about Goldman’s role.

Analysts wonder why Mr. Paulson hasn’t hired more individuals from other banks to limit the appearance that the Treasury Department has become a de facto Goldman division. Others ask whose interests Mr. Paulson and his coterie of former Goldman executives have in mind: those overseeing tottering financial services firms, or average homeowners squeezed by the crisis?

Still others question whether Goldman alumni leading the federal bailout have the breadth and depth of experience needed to tackle financial problems of such complexity — and whether Mr. Paulson has cast his net widely enough to ensure that innovative responses are pursued.

“He’s brought on people who have the same life experiences and ideologies as he does,” said William K. Black, an associate professor of law and economics at the University of Missouri and counsel to the Federal Home Loan Bank Board during the savings and loan crisis of the 1980s. “These people were trained by Paulson, evaluated by Paulson so their mind-set is not just shaped in generalized group think — it’s specific Paulson group think.”

Not so fast, say Goldman’s supporters. They vehemently dismiss suggestions that Mr. Paulson’s team would elevate Goldman’s interests above those of other banks, homeowners and taxpayers. Such chatter, they say, is a paranoid theory peddled, almost always anonymously, by less successful rivals. Just add black helicopters, they joke.

“There is no conspiracy,” said Donald C. Langevoort, a law professor at Georgetown University. “Clearly if time were not a problem, you would have a committee of independent people vetting all of the potential conflicts, responding to questions whether someone ought to be involved with a particular aspect or project or not because of relationships with a former firm — but those things do take time and can’t be imposed in an emergency situation.”

In fact, Goldman’s admirers say, the firm’s ranks should be praised, not criticized, for taking a leadership role in the crisis.

“There are people at Goldman Sachs making no money, living at hotels, trying to save the financial world,” said Jes Staley, the head of JPMorgan Chase’s asset management division. “To indict Goldman Sachs for the people helping out Washington is wrong.”

Goldman concurs. “We’re proud of our alumni, but frankly, when they work in the public sector, their presence is more of a negative than a positive for us in terms of winning business,” said Lucas Van Praag, a spokesman for Goldman. “There is no mileage for them in giving Goldman Sachs the corporate equivalent of most-favored-nation status.”

MR. PAULSON himself landed atop Treasury because of a Goldman tie. Joshua B. Bolten, a former Goldman executive and President Bush’s chief of staff, helped recruit him to the post in 2006.

Some analysts say that given the pressures Mr. Paulson faced creating a SWAT team to address the financial crisis, it was only natural for him to turn to his former firm for a capable battery.

And if there is one thing Goldman has, it is an imposing army of top-of-their-class, up-before-dawn über-achievers. The most prominent former Goldman banker now working for Mr. Paulson at Treasury is also perhaps the most unlikely.

Neel T. Kashkari arrived in Washington in 2006 after spending two years as a low-level technology investment banker for Goldman in San Francisco, where he advised start-up computer security companies. Before joining Goldman, Mr. Kashkari, who has two engineering degrees in addition to an M.B.A. from the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, worked on satellite projects for TRW, the space company that now belongs to Northrop Grumman.

He was originally appointed to oversee a $700 billion fund that Mr. Paulson orchestrated to buy toxic and complex bank assets, but the role evolved as his boss decided to invest taxpayer money directly in troubled financial institutions.

Mr. Kashkari, who met Mr. Paulson only briefly before going to the Treasury Department, is also in charge of selecting the staff to run the bailout program. One of his early picks was Reuben Jeffrey, a former Goldman executive, to serve as interim chief investment officer.

Mr. Kashkari is considered highly intelligent and talented. He has also been Mr. Paulson’s right-hand man — and constant public shadow — during the financial crisis.

He played a main role in the emergency sale of Bear Stearns to JPMorgan Chase in March, sitting in a Park Avenue conference room as details of the acquisition were hammered out. He often exited the room to funnel information to Mr. Paulson about the progress.

Despite Mr. Kashkari’s talents in deal-making, there are widespread questions about whether he has the experience or expertise to manage such a project.

“Mr. Kashkari may be the most brilliant, talented person in the United States, but the optics of putting a 35-year-old Paulson protégé in charge of what, at least at one point, was supposed to be the most important part of the recovery effort are just very damaging,” said Michael Greenberger, a University of Maryland law professor and a former senior official with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

“The American people are fed up with Wall Street, and there are plenty of people around who could have been brought in here to offer broader judgment on these problems,” Mr. Greenberger added. “All wisdom about financial matters does not reside on Wall Street.”

Mr. Kashkari won’t directly manage the bailout fund. More than 200 firms submitted bids to oversee pieces of the program, and Treasury has winnowed the list to fewer than 10 and could announce the results as early as this week. Goldman submitted a bid but offered to provide its services gratis.

While Mr. Kashkari is playing a prominent public role, other Goldman alumni dominate Mr. Paulson’s inner sanctum.

The A-team includes Dan Jester, a former strategic officer for Goldman who has been involved in most of Treasury’s recent initiatives, especially the government takeover of the mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Mr. Jester has also been central to the effort to inject capital into banks, a list that includes Goldman.

Another central player is Steve Shafran, who grew close to Mr. Paulson in the 1990s while working in Goldman’s private equity business in Asia. Initially focused on student loan problems, Mr. Shafran quickly became involved in Treasury’s initiative to guarantee money market funds, among other things.

Mr. Shafran, who retired from Goldman in 2000, had settled with his family in Ketchum, Idaho, where he joined the city council. Baird Gourlay, the council president, said he had spoken a couple of times with Mr. Shafran since he returned to Washington last year.

“He was initially working on the student loan part of the problem,” Mr. Gourlay said. “But as things started falling apart, he said Paulson was relying on him more and more.”

The Treasury Department said Mr. Shafran and the other former Goldman executives were unavailable for comment.

Other prominent former Goldman executives now at Treasury include Kendrick R. Wilson III, a seasoned adviser to chief executives of the nation’s biggest banks. Mr. Wilson, an unpaid adviser, mainly spends his time working his ample contact list of bank chiefs to apprise them of possible Treasury plans and gauge reaction.

Another Goldman veteran, Edward C. Forst, served briefly as an adviser to Mr. Paulson on setting up the bailout fund but has since left to return to his post as executive vice president of Harvard. Robert K. Steel, a former vice chairman at Goldman, was tapped to look at ways to shore up Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Mr. Steel left Treasury to become chief executive of Wachovia this summer before the government took over the entities.

Treasury officials acknowledge that former Goldman executives have played an enormous role in responding to the current crisis. But they also note that many other top Treasury Department officials with no ties to Goldman are doing significant work, often without notice. This group includes David G. Nason, a senior adviser to Mr. Paulson and a former Securities and Exchange Commission official.

Robert F. Hoyt, general counsel at Treasury, has also worked around the clock in recent weeks to make sure the department’s unprecedented moves pass legal muster. Michele Davis is a Capitol Hill veteran and Treasury policy director. None of them are Goldmanites.

“Secretary Paulson has a deep bench of seasoned financial policy experts with varied experience,” said Jennifer Zuccarelli, a spokeswoman for the Treasury. “Bringing additional expertise to bear at times like these is clearly in the taxpayers’ and the U.S. economy’s best interests.”

While many Wall Streeters have made the trek to Washington, there is no question that the axis of power at the Treasury Department tilts toward Goldman. That has led some to assume that the interests of the bank, and Wall Street more broadly, are the first priority. There is also the question of whether the department’s actions benefit the personal finances of the former Goldman executives and their friends.

“To the extent that they have a portfolio or blind trust that holds Goldman Sachs stock, they have conflicts,” said James K. Galbraith, a professor of government and business relations at the University of Texas. “To the extent that they have ties and alumni loyalty or friendships with people that are still there, they have potential conflicts.”

Mr. Paulson, Mr. Kashkari and Mr. Shafran no longer own any Goldman shares. It is unclear whether Mr. Jester or Mr. Wilson does because, according to the Treasury Department, they were hired as contractors and are not required to disclose their financial holdings.

For every naysayer, meanwhile, there is also a Goldman defender who says the bank’s alumni are doing what they have done since the days when Sidney Weinberg ran the bank in the 1930s and urged his bankers to give generously to charities and volunteer for public service.

“I give Hank credit for attracting so many talented people. None of these guys need to do this,” said Barry Volpert, a managing director at Crestview Partners and a former co-chief operating officer of Goldman’s private equity business. “They’re not getting paid. They’re killing themselves. They haven’t seen their families for months. The idea that there’s some sort of cabal or conflict here is nonsense.”

In fact, say some Goldman executives, the perception of a conflict of interest has actually cost them opportunities in the crisis. For instance, Goldman wasn’t allowed to examine the books of Bear Stearns when regulators were orchestrating an emergency sale of the faltering investment bank.

THIS summer, as he fought for the survival of Lehman Brothers, Richard S. Fuld Jr., its chief executive, made a final plea to regulators to turn his investment bank into a bank holding company, which would allow it to receive constant access to federal funding.

Timothy F. Geithner, the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, told him no, according to a former Lehman executive who requested anonymity because of continuing investigations of the firm’s demise. Its options exhausted, Lehman filed for bankruptcy in mid-September.

One week later, Goldman and Morgan Stanley were designated bank holding companies.

“That was our idea three months ago, and they wouldn’t let us do it,” said a former senior Lehman executive who requested anonymity because he was not authorized to comment publicly. “But when Goldman got in trouble, they did it right away. No one could believe it.”

The New York Fed, which declined to comment, has become, after Treasury, the favorite target for Goldman conspiracy theorists. As the most powerful regional member of the Federal Reserve system, and based in the nation’s financial capital, it has been a driving force in efforts to shore up the flailing financial system.

Mr. Geithner, 47, played a pivotal role in the decision to let Lehman die and to bail out A.I.G. A 20-year public servant, he has never worked in the financial sector. Some analysts say that has left him reliant on Wall Street chiefs to guide his thinking and that Goldman alumni have figured prominently in his ascent.

After working at the New York consulting firm Kissinger Associates, Mr. Geithner landed at the Treasury Department in 1988, eventually catching the eye of Robert E. Rubin, Goldman’s former co-chairman. Mr. Rubin, who became Treasury secretary in 1995, kept Mr. Geithner at his side through several international meltdowns, including the Russian credit crisis in the late 1990s.

Mr. Rubin, now senior counselor at Citigroup, declined to comment.

A few years later, in 2003, Mr. Geithner was named president of the New York Fed. Leading the search committee was Pete G. Peterson, the former head of Lehman Brothers and the senior chairman of the private equity firm Blackstone. Among those on an outside advisory committee were the former Fed chairman Paul A. Volcker; the former A.I.G. chief executive Maurice R. Greenberg; and John C. Whitehead, a former co-chairman of Goldman.

The board of the New York Fed is led by Stephen Friedman, a former chairman of Goldman. He is a “Class C” director, meaning that he was appointed by the board to represent the public.

Mr. Friedman, who wears many hats, including that of chairman of the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, did not return calls for comment.

During his tenure, Mr. Geithner has turned to Goldman in filling important positions or to handle special projects. He hired a former Goldman economist, William C. Dudley, to oversee the New York Fed unit that buys and sells government securities. He also tapped E. Gerald Corrigan, a well-regarded Goldman managing director and former New York Fed president, to reconvene a group to analyze risk on Wall Street.

Some people say that all of these Goldman ties to the New York Fed are simply too close for comfort. “It’s grotesque,” said Christopher Whalen, a managing partner at Institutional Risk Analytics and a critic of the Fed. “And it’s done without apology.”

A person familiar with Mr. Geithner’s thinking who was not authorized to speak publicly said that there was “no secret handshake” between the New York Fed and Goldman, describing such speculation as a conspiracy theory.

Furthermore, others say, it makes sense that Goldman would have a presence in organizations like the New York Fed.

“This is a very small, close-knit world. The fact that all of the major financial services firms, investment banking firms are in New York City means that when work is to be done, you’re going to be dealing with one of these guys,” said Mr. Langevoort at Georgetown. “The work of selecting the head of the New York Fed or a blue-ribbon commission — any of that sort of work — is going to involve a standard cast of characters.”

Being inside may not curry special favor anyway, some people note. Even though Mr. Fuld served on the board of the New York Fed, his proximity to federal power didn’t spare Lehman from bankruptcy.

But when bankruptcy loomed for A.I.G. — a collapse regulators feared would take down the entire financial system — federal officials found themselves once again turning to someone who had a Goldman connection. Once the government decided to grant A.I.G., the largest insurance company, an $85 billion lifeline (which has since grown to about $122 billion) to prevent a collapse, regulators, including Mr. Paulson and Mr. Geithner, wanted new executive blood at the top.

They picked Edward M. Liddy, the former C.E.O. of the insurer Allstate. Mr. Liddy had been a Goldman director since 2003 — he resigned after taking the A.I.G. job — and was chairman of the audit committee. (Another former Goldman executive, Suzanne Nora Johnson, was named to the A.I.G. board this summer.)

Like many Wall Street firms, Goldman also had financial ties to A.I.G. It was the insurer’s largest trading partner, with exposure to $20 billion in credit derivatives, and could have faced losses had A.I.G. collapsed. Goldman has said repeatedly that its exposure to A.I.G. was “immaterial” and that the $20 billion was hedged so completely that it would have insulated the firm from significant losses.

As the financial crisis has taken on a more global cast in recent weeks, Mr. Paulson has sat across the table from former Goldman colleagues, including Robert B. Zoellick, now president of the World Bank; Mario Draghi, president of the international group of regulators called the Financial Stability Forum; and Mark J. Carney, the governor of the Bank of Canada.

BUT Mr. Paulson’s home team is still what draws the most scrutiny.

“Paulson put Goldman people into these positions at Treasury because these are the people he knows and there are no constraints on him not to do so,” Mr. Whalen says. “The appearance of conflict of interest is everywhere, and that used to be enough. However, we’ve decided to dispense with the basic principles of checks and balances and our ethical standards in times of crisis.”

Ultimately, analysts say, the actions of Mr. Paulson and his alumni club may come under more study.

“I suspect the conduct of Goldman Sachs and other bankers in the rescue will be a background theme, if not a highlighted theme, as Congress decides how much regulation, how much control and frankly, how punitive to be with respect to the financial services industry,” said Mr. Langevoort at Georgetown. “The settling up is going to come in Congress next spring.”
Read more on the financial crisis in the New York Times

CHANNEL 13 HOUSTON UNDERCOVER: WHERE DO TOLL FEES GO?

2008-10-15T08:37:00.009-06:00

Channel 13 KTRK- TV Houston - Tuesday, October 14, 2008
[DFWRCC EDITOR'S NOTE: This is a video you should see. Even though this story is about Harris county, the loophole which makes this "legal" is in Texas State Law, therefore it has statewide ramifications. ]

Eyewitness News Report By Wayne Dolcefino - HOUSTON (KTRK)
-- Think Harris County toll road fines are outrageous? Wait till you hear how the county attorney is spending some of your money.
That's $2 million of your money. We thought you should know how the county attorney is spending it. We all know what happens when you don't pay a toll. How fifty cents becomes 34.50?

"I think they're outrageous," said toll road customer Jimmy Deal. "Ridiculous."

Notice on the bill there's a $1 fee that goes directly to the Harris County Attorney from every unpaid toll.

"I agree with you. It's public money," said Harris County attorney Mike Stafford.

"Does it say on there what it goes for?" asked toll road customer T.J. Swift.

State law only says "the fund shall be at the sole discretion of the county attorney and may be used only to defray the salaries and expenses of the attorney's office."

"It doesn't say it's only to be used for toll road efforts," Stafford said.

In fact, when we examined the fund, we couldn't find a single penny used for toll road business.

"What I like about toll road fund is its toll road violator dollars," Stafford said. "It's not tax dollars."

So where is the money going?

"This is pure and simple a county attorney office slush fund," said tax watchdog Bob Lemer
.

Coconut shrimp anyone? That's part of the menu for the county attorney's office Christmas party.

Yes. Your toll fines paid for the catering bills from the east side Italian eatery Pizzinis. One party cost $5,625.

That's money from the fines of 5,600 trips through the toll booth.

"That's pretty disappointing and they haven't invited me to the party," said toll road customer JJ Cannon.

In one year, they used more than $17,000 in toll fines on Italian food.

"This is just a totally improper use of taxpayer money," Lemer said.

"It improves morale of the office, makes the office a better place to work at no cost to taxpayers," Stafford said

"Those are taxpayers sitting in those cars going through those toll road booths," Lemer said.

Oh, we forgot to add the Star Pizza parties.

"So that's where my money is going and I'm not invited. That's a bad deal," Deal said.

Next time you get called for jury duty you'll have to pay $5.50 for parking a day. Too bad you don't have control of that toll road fund.

The county attorney's office has used $196,000 so they can all park for free, even though most county employees have to pay their own way.

Sheriff's deputies pay three bucks to park in another lot every day.

"Anytime I can use the fund instead of tax dollars I'm going do it," Stafford said.

More than two million dollars has gone into the public toll road fund. Nearly $100,000 has gone to provide extra pay to selected employees.

"There were people who were unable to get a raise because of the salary cap and they deserved it," Stafford said.

Oh, by the way, the toll road fund could have been used to pay the salaries of the county lawyers who are working with the toll road. Two lawyers were paid $225,000 a year.

"I think that's an idea worth considering," Stafford said.

Instead of coconut shrimp.

We began examining the toll road fund as we investigated the county attorney's relationship to one of his employees. Tuesday our hidden cameras go into action.

Major Players in TTC and SH 121 Toll Financing Scenario hit with Financial Crisis

2008-10-08T11:13:00.003-06:00

DRWRCC Editor's note: This article is being posted here because Goldman Sacks has a cozy relationship with key players in the Dallas District TxDOT office. Last year a memo surfaced which appeared to have been authored by Goldman Sacks evaluating NTTA's financial ability to build and manage SH!21. Investigations showed that the memo was actually authored by an engineer in the TxDOT Dallas District Office and circulated under the Goldman Sacks name just as the NTCOG RTC's was deciding between Cintra or NTTA for awarding the lucrative toll contract for SH121. Investment banks are heavily involved in financing (and profiting from) Texas road contracts. Washington and Wall Street impact the cost of public services and infrastructure in Texas cities, counties and the state. This behind-the-scenes article sheds light on some of the players and decisions which are impacting the pocketbooks of DFW regional citizens and Texans in every county of this state.

Agency’s ’04 Rule Let Banks Pile Up New Debt
By STEPHEN LABATON - The New York Times - October 2, 2008

“We have a good deal of comfort about the capital cushions at these firms at the moment.” — Christopher Cox, chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, March 11, 2008.

As rumors swirled that Bear Stearns faced imminent collapse in early March, Christopher Cox was told by his staff that Bear Stearns had $17 billion in cash and other assets — more than enough to weather the storm.

Drained of most of its cash three days later, Bear Stearns was forced into a hastily arranged marriage with JPMorgan Chase — backed by a $29 billion taxpayer dowry.

Within six months, other lions of Wall Street would also either disappear or transform themselves to survive the financial maelstrom — Merrill Lynch sold itself to Bank of America, Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy protection, and Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley converted to commercial banks.

How could Mr. Cox have been so wrong?

Many events in Washington, on Wall Street and elsewhere around the country have led to what has been called the most serious financial crisis since the 1930s. But decisions made at a brief meeting on April 28, 2004, explain why the problems could spin out of control. The agency’s failure to follow through on those decisions also explains why Washington regulators did not see what was coming.

On that bright spring afternoon, the five members of the Securities and Exchange Commission met in a basement hearing room to consider an urgent plea by the big investment banks.

They wanted an exemption for their brokerage units from an old regulation that limited the amount of debt they could take on. The exemption would unshackle billions of dollars held in reserve as a cushion against losses on their investments. Those funds could then flow up to the parent company, enabling it to invest in the fast-growing but opaque world of mortgage-backed securities; credit derivatives, a form of insurance for bond holders; and other exotic instruments.

The five investment banks led the charge, including Goldman Sachs, which was headed by Henry M. Paulson Jr. Two years later, he left to become Treasury secretary.

A lone dissenter — a software consultant and expert on risk management — weighed in from Indiana with a two-page letter to warn the commission that the move was a grave mistake. He never heard back from Washington.

One commissioner, Harvey J. Goldschmid, questioned the staff about the consequences of the proposed exemption. It would only be available for the largest firms, he was reassuringly told — those with assets greater than $5 billion.

“We’ve said these are the big guys,” Mr. Goldschmid said, provoking nervous laughter, “but that means if anything goes wrong, it’s going to be an awfully big mess.”

Mr. Goldschmid, an authority on securities law from Columbia, was a behind-the-scenes adviser in 2002 to Senator Paul S. Sarbanes when he rewrote the nation’s corporate laws after a wave of accounting scandals. “Do we feel secure if there are these drops in capital we really will have investor protection?” Mr. Goldschmid asked. A senior staff member said the commission would hire the best minds, including people with strong quantitative skills to parse the banks’ balance sheets.

Annette L. Nazareth, the head of market regulation, reassured the commission that under the new rules, the companies for the first time could be restricted by the commission from excessively risky activity. She was later appointed a commissioner and served until January 2008.

“I’m very happy to support it,” said Commissioner Roel C. Campos, a former federal prosecutor and owner of a small radio broadcasting company from Houston, who then deadpanned: “And I keep my fingers crossed for the future.”

The proceeding was sparsely attended. None of the major media outlets, including The New York Times, covered it.

After 55 minutes of discussion, which can now be heard on the Web sites of the agency and The Times, the chairman, William H. Donaldson, a veteran Wall Street executive, called for a vote. It was unanimous. The decision, changing what was known as the net capital rule, was completed and published in The Federal Register a few months later.

With that, the five big independent investment firms were unleashed.

In loosening the capital rules, which are supposed to provide a buffer in turbulent times, the agency also decided to rely on the firms’ own computer models for determining the riskiness of investments, essentially outsourcing the job of monitoring risk to the banks themselves.

Over the following months and years, each of the firms would take advantage of the looser rules. At Bear Stearns, the leverage ratio — a measurement of how much the firm was borrowing compared to its total assets — rose sharply, to 33 to 1. In other words, for every dollar in equity, it had $33 of debt. The ratios at the other firms also rose significantly.

The 2004 decision for the first time gave the S.E.C. a window on the banks’ increasingly risky investments in mortgage-related securities.

But the agency never took true advantage of that part of the bargain. The supervisory program under Mr. Cox, who arrived at the agency a year later, was a low priority.

The commission assigned seven people to examine the parent companies — which last year controlled financial empires with combined assets of more than $4 trillion. Since March 2007, the office has not had a director. And as of last month, the office had not completed a single inspection since it was reshuffled by Mr. Cox more than a year and a half ago.

The few problems the examiners preliminarily uncovered about the riskiness of the firms’ investments and their increased reliance on debt — clear signs of trouble — were all but ignored.

The commission’s division of trading and markets “became aware of numerous potential red flags prior to Bear Stearns’s collapse, regarding its concentration of mortgage securities, high leverage, shortcomings of risk management in mortgage-backed securities and lack of compliance with the spirit of certain” capital standards, said an inspector general’s report issued last Friday. But the division “did not take actions to limit these risk factors.”

Drive to Deregulate

The commission’s decision effectively to outsource its oversight to the firms themselves fit squarely in the broader Washington culture of the last eight years under President Bush.

A similar closeness to industry and laissez-faire philosophy has driven a push for deregulation throughout the government, from the Consumer Product Safety Commission and the Environmental Protection Agency to worker safety and transportation agencies.

“It’s a fair criticism of the Bush administration that regulators have relied on many voluntary regulatory programs,” said Roderick M. Hills, a Republican who was chairman of the S.E.C. under President Gerald R. Ford. “The problem with such voluntary programs is that, as we’ve seen throughout history, they often don’t work.”

As was the case with other agencies, the commission’s decision was motivated by industry complaints of excessive regulation at a time of growing competition from overseas. The 2004 decision was aimed at easing regulatory burdens that the European Union was about to impose on the foreign operations of United States investment banks.

The Europeans said they would agree not to regulate the foreign subsidiaries of the investment banks on one condition — that the commission regulate the parent companies, along with the brokerage units that the S.E.C. already oversaw.

A 1999 law, however, had left a gap that did not give the commission explicit oversight of the parent companies. To get around that problem, and in exchange for the relaxed capital rules, the banks volunteered to let the commission examine the books of their parent companies and subsidiaries.

The 2004 decision also reflected a faith that Wall Street’s financial interests coincided with Washington’s regulatory interests.

“We foolishly believed that the firms had a strong culture of self-preservation and responsibility and would have the discipline not to be excessively borrowing,” said Professor James D. Cox, an expert on securities law and accounting at Duke School of Law (and no relationship to Christopher Cox).

“Letting the firms police themselves made sense to me because I didn’t think the S.E.C. had the staff and wherewithal to impose its own standards and I foolishly thought the market would impose its own self-discipline. We’ve all learned a terrible lesson,” he added.

In letters to the commissioners, senior executives at the five investment banks complained about what they called unnecessary regulation and oversight by both American and European authorities. A lone voice of dissent in the 2004 proceeding came from a software consultant from Valparaiso, Ind., who said the computer models run by the firms — which the regulators would be relying on — could not anticipate moments of severe market turbulence.

“With the stroke of a pen, capital requirements are removed!” the consultant, Leonard D. Bole, wrote to the commission on Jan. 22, 2004. “Has the trading environment changed sufficiently since 1997, when the current requirements were enacted, that the commission is confident that current requirements in examples such as these can be disregarded?”

He said that similar computer standards had failed to protect Long-Term Capital Management, the hedge fund that collapsed in 1998, and could not protect companies from the market plunge of October 1987.

Mr. Bole, who earned a master’s degree in business administration at the University of Chicago, helps write computer programs that financial institutions use to meet capital requirements.

He said in a recent interview that he was never called by anyone from the commission.

“I’m a little guy in the land of giants,” he said. “I thought that the reduction in capital was rather dramatic.”

Policing Wall Street

A once-proud agency with a rich history at the intersection of Washington and Wall Street, the Securities and Exchange Commission was created during the Great Depression as part of the broader effort to restore confidence to battered investors. It was led in its formative years by heavyweight New Dealers, including James Landis and William O. Douglas. When President Franklin D. Roosevelt was asked in 1934 why he appointed Joseph P. Kennedy, a spectacularly successful stock speculator, as the agency’s first chairman, Roosevelt replied: “Set a thief to catch a thief.”

The commission’s most public role in policing Wall Street is its enforcement efforts. But critics say that in recent years it has failed to deter market problems.

“It seems to me the enforcement effort in recent years has fallen short of what one Supreme Court justice once called the fear of the shotgun behind the door,” said Arthur Levitt Jr., who was S.E.C. chairman in the Clinton administration. “With this commission, the shotgun too rarely came out from behind the door.”

Christopher Cox had been a close ally of business groups in his 17 years as a House member from one of the most conservative districts in Southern California. Mr. Cox had led the effort to rewrite securities laws to make investor lawsuits harder to file. He also fought against accounting rules that would give less favorable treatment to executive stock options.

Under Mr. Cox, the commission responded to complaints by some businesses by making it more difficult for the enforcement staff to investigate and bring cases against companies. The commission has repeatedly reversed or reduced proposed settlements that companies had tentatively agreed upon. While the number of enforcement cases has risen, the number of cases involving significant players or large amounts of money has declined.

Mr. Cox dismantled a risk management office created by Mr. Donaldson that was assigned to watch for future problems. While other financial regulatory agencies criticized a blueprint by Mr. Paulson, the Treasury secretary, that proposed to reduce their stature — and that of the S.E.C. — Mr. Cox did not challenge the plan, leaving it to three former Democratic and Republican commission chairmen to complain that the blueprint would neuter the agency.

In the process, Mr. Cox has surrounded himself with conservative lawyers, economists and accountants who, before the market turmoil of recent months, had embraced a far more limited vision for the commission than many of his predecessors.

‘Stakes in the Ground’

Last Friday, the commission formally ended the 2004 program, acknowledging that it had failed to anticipate the problems at Bear Stearns and the four other major investment banks.

“The last six months have made it abundantly clear that voluntary regulation does not work,” Mr. Cox said.

The decision to shutter the program came after Mr. Cox was blamed by Senator John McCain, the Republican presidential candidate, for the crisis. Mr. McCain has demanded Mr. Cox’s resignation.

Mr. Cox has said that the 2004 program was flawed from its inception. But former officials as well as the inspector general’s report have suggested that a major reason for its failure was Mr. Cox’s use of it.

“In retrospect, the tragedy is that the 2004 rule making gave us the ability to get information that would have been critical to sensible monitoring, and yet the S.E.C. didn’t oversee well enough,” Mr. Goldschmid said in an interview. He and Mr. Donaldson left the commission in 2005.

Mr. Cox declined requests for an interview. In response to written questions, including whether he or the commission had made any mistakes over the last three years that contributed to the current crisis, he said, “There will be no shortage of retrospective analyses about what happened and what should have happened.” He said that by last March he had concluded that the monitoring program’s “metrics were inadequate.”

He said that because the commission did not have the authority to curtail the heavy borrowing at Bear Stearns and the other firms, he and the commission were powerless to stop it.

“Implementing a purely voluntary program was very difficult because the commission’s regulations shouldn’t be suggestions,” he said. “The fact these companies could withdraw from voluntary supervision at their discretion diminished the mandate of the program and weakened its effectiveness. Experience has shown that the S.E.C. could not bootstrap itself into authority it didn’t have.”

But critics say that the commission could have done more, and that the agency’s effectiveness comes from the tone set at the top by the chairman, or what Mr. Levitt, the longest-serving S.E.C. chairman in history, calls “stakes in the ground.”

“If you go back to the chairmen in recent years, you will see that each spoke about a variety of issues that were important to them,” Mr. Levitt said. “This commission placed very few stakes in the ground.”

With Bonds in Trouble, States Seek Federal Help

2008-10-08T11:08:00.003-06:00

By MARY WILLIAMS WALSH and RANDAL C. ARCHIBOLD - The New York Times - October 7, 2008
California and other states scrambled on Tuesday to cope with bills coming due as they pressed Washington for assistance because the municipal bond markets remain largely closed to them.

In Washington, White House officials said they were talking with state officials and reviewing the issue of aid. But despite the urgency of the problem, thorny legal issues have emerged.

Though the federal government has taken extraordinary steps to lend money to corporations in the short-term markets, and to provide more money to banks, officials have been stymied over how to assist local governments because of their status as issuers of tax-exempt bonds.

A longstanding provision of the Internal Revenue Code bars the federal government from guaranteeing tax-exempt bonds. Officials are concerned that if the federal government helps states and others without Congressional action it could put their tax exemption at risk.

While officials seek a way around this obstacle, many local governments are running into severe cash squeezes.

California has the largest and most pressing problem. The state has told the Treasury Department it might need an emergency loan of up to $7 billion to pay its day-to-day bills in coming weeks, including those to school districts and municipal governments due on Oct. 29. Massachusetts has also reached out for help.

“It’s critical,” said Jeffrey L. Esser, executive director of the Government Finance Officers Association. “There are no buyers out there for the governments, to meet their short-term financing needs.”

Among the ideas being discussed is finding a way for the federal government to provide some guarantee of municipal bonds without violating the tax code, and in that way building investor confidence in the bonds.

“I think there are partial guarantees or other federal programs that would fall short of the full guarantee that might not violate this code section,” said Richard Chirls, a partner at Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe, the bond counsel to California.

Another approach may be to include some short-term municipal issues under the Federal Reserve’s newest program to buy commercial paper.

California has an immediate problem because, like many other places, it receives tax revenue in batches during the year. The state is accustomed to borrowing in short-term markets in the fall, to tide itself over through the lean months before the next batch of tax revenue comes in. The credit markets froze just when California would have issued its revenue anticipation notes.

Other governments have run into a cash squeeze because they have issued a type of short-term debt with an interest rate that resets every week. That worked until the credit markets froze, but now the interest rates that governments pay on such debt are tripling or quadrupling.

The trouble in the credit markets has compounded the deteriorating finances of many states and cities, which are finding the revenues they had projected months ago are now falling short, sometimes drastically.

Andrew A. Davis, executive director of the Illinois Student Assistance Commission, said that if the federal government stepped in to help California, other states might expect similar relief instead of tackling tough budget issues themselves. “There’s going to be very little incentive to levy taxes,” Mr. Davis said.

Even if states get short-term access to credit, many will need to take further steps to balance their budgets. Unlike the federal government, they are generally required to balance their budgets each year.

In California, the most populous state and one of those suffering the most from the housing slump, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said he would meet with legislators on Wednesday to propose possible routes out of the state’s crisis.

The California treasurer, Bill Lockyer, said he would discuss the possibility of tapping into the state’s big public pension funds with their managers. Mr. Lockyer said he would see if they could buy some of the state’s short-term notes, or issue a line of credit, if the markets do not improve and the federal government cannot help.

Before the problem became critical this month, California was relying on optimistic revenue forecasts to balance its budget. Now it is coming up short again, possibly by as much as $1 billion.

Massachusetts, which has also told the federal government it might need assistance, withdrew a planned $750 million offer of short-term notes on Tuesday, for the second time in two weeks, saying that the market seemed inhospitable and that it could dip into a state fund for emergencies.

North Carolina said it was fielding calls from other states about how to duplicate an innovative deal it struck to borrow $1.1 billion from the state employees’ credit union. It is using the money to provide student loans. Illinois recently completed a similar deal for about $100 million with a group of eight credit unions, also for student lending.

The New York State Insurance Department put together a $1 billion package to assist Jefferson County, Ala., on Tuesday, to help keep the county from declaring bankruptcy. It has been teetering for several months, after having issued a large number of variable-rate bonds for major improvements in its sewer system.

These unusual measures show just how much pressure some local governments face as their tax revenues dry up and the credit squeeze prevents them from issuing the kind of debt that they have long relied on to handle their operations.

“Talking to our members in the last week or so, it is so bleak,” said Scott Pattison, executive director of the National Association of State Budget Officers, adding that just two weeks ago he never would have dreamed the situation would become so dire.

A handful of well-rated debt offerings did come to market on Tuesday, but for the most part the markets were quiet.

The Long Island Power Authority sold the largest municipal bond issue since the credit squeeze began, aided in part by bond insurance provided by Berkshire Hathaway, the company headed by Warren E. Buffett. Berkshire stepped in to fill a gap in the bond insurance business earlier this year, but has received more attention in recent days by investing in Goldman Sachs, the lead underwriter for the utility’s bond issue, and in General Electric.

The Cold Spring Harbor school district on Long Island also sold a relatively small $7 million issue of tax anticipation notes on Tuesday, but its success seemed to stem from not urgently needing the money. “We’re one of two school districts in the whole state that has a triple-A uninsured bond rating,” said the district’s assistant superintendent for business, William Bernhard.

Absent extraordinary measures by the Federal Reserve, investors were not buying anything except Treasury securities, said Mark V. McCray, managing director and portfolio manager for Pimco.

“There is absolute panic in the markets,” Mr. McCray said. “People are hoarding cash.”

Edmund L. Andrews and Katie Zezima contributed reporting.
Read more in the New York Times

TxDOT buys time with borrowed funds for Dallas-area projects

2008-10-06T11:13:00.005-06:00

By MICHAEL A. LINDENBERGER - The Dallas Morning News - Sunday, October 5, 2008
State transportation officials are poised to issue billions of dollars in debt to help speed road construction, a move that will keep Dallas-area projects on schedule for now but will do little to shore up the state's long-term road-funding crisis.

The Texas Department of Transportation will likely begin issuing $1.5 billion in bonds within 60 days, pending the recovery of the nation's upended credit markets, and is taking steps to borrow another $6.4 billion over the next few years.

Historic turmoil in the credit markets is already costing the department hundreds of thousands of dollars in extra interest payments each week on some of its smaller loans, and any efforts to borrow much more will be complicated – and likely delayed – if the markets do not improve.

Credit worries aside, the decision to borrow billions enables TxDOT to end months of hand-wringing over whether it will have the money to complete projects local officials throughout Texas have been depending on. Late last year, the agency announced it was going broke and would have to delay some of those projects.

The new borrowing will allow the state to keep projects on schedule. But the big debt will do nothing to reduce the state's long-term shortage of road funds and could make paying for future projects more difficult as interest costs grow.

"Borrowing money does have the benefit of building projects faster," said Michael Morris, North Central Texas Council of Governments' transportation director. "Borrowing money does nothing for building more projects [in the long term]. Some people will be confused that building projects faster solves the problem, but it doesn't address the total funding need."

Mr. Morris says North Texas' transportation needs are $50 billion ahead of expected tax revenues between now and 2030. Some critics call those numbers too pessimistic, but everyone agrees that the number is big. Conservative estimates have said statewide needs will outpace funding by $50 billion to $60 billion.

Meeting last week in Austin, Texas Transportation Commission members said the bond program won't fix a basically busted system – and could make things worse if the Legislature doesn't eventually provide new tax funds.

"The system for funding TxDOT is fatally flawed," said Ned Holmes of Houston, one of five members of the Texas Transportation Commission that runs the department.

A political problem

Few leaders in Austin disagree with Mr. Holmes.

But while lawmakers, the governor and TxDOT all seem to agree Texas needs more money for roads, consensus on a solution beyond more borrowing has proven devilishly difficult to reach.

One camp argues that, of course TxDOT is going broke, given that state gasoline taxes have remained flat since 1991, at 20 cents per gallon. However, efforts to raise the tax rate have been dead in the water for years.

"As far as the gas tax goes, there is simply no appetite in the Legislature for that. None at all," said Allison Castle, press secretary for Gov. Rick Perry, said. "To make a real difference, you'd have to raise it 50 to 55 cents per gallon. Raising it a nickel or two would be just giving false hope."

But even simply indexing the 20-cent-per-gallon rate to inflation would have a huge impact over time, said Senate Transportation Chairman John Carona, R-Dallas. He said he is going to press for that this session.

"If we had had the courage to do that two years ago, we'd be in a substantially better place already," Mr. Carona said.

Tolls

For the past five years, the governor has pushed instead to build more toll roads and then to borrow heavily against future revenue.

"Toll roads are fair, as they are essentially user fees, and drivers can decide whether to use them or not," said his spokeswoman.

Opposition to tolls, especially private toll roads, was a powerful force during the 2007 session, and even lawmakers who say some tolls are helpful also argue that Mr. Perry has pushed too hard for tolls.

"We have 15 major highways proposed in Dallas-Fort Worth, and all 15 are planned as toll roads," Mr. Carona said. "In that situation, you can no longer say tolls are an option for motorists. If they are all built, you won't be able to drive anywhere in Dallas without using a toll road."

Mr. Holmes, too, acknowledged the governor and the agency under former chairman Ric Williamson had been too focused on tolls as the solution.

"They came up with a solution that did not require TxDOT to go to the Legislature to ask for new funds," he said. "But tolling was never going to work by itself."

Ready to borrow

For now, the only solution lawmakers and the governor have agreed on is to borrow another $8 billion.

It's not a new direction. From 2002 to 2007, the department first went on a borrowing spree – and then a building spree, much to the delight of traffic-clogged regions like North Texas. In those years, the department spent as much as $5 billion a year in construction contracts.

But by 2007 TxDOT had spent the money and was left with flat revenues, rising costs and hefty interest payments. TxDOT says it has about $2.5 billion in tax money to spend on major road contracts annually, about half what it was spending in recent years. It also warns that soaring maintenance costs could soon eat up as much as $2 billion a year.

"We're fast going to be at a place where we simply have to tell the locals, we're out of the business of building new roads," said Commissioner Ted Houghton of El Paso.

To delay that, TxDOT is ready to borrow again. But those new dollars will only delay, not solve, the department's long-term funding crisis.

More time may be what TxDOT needs most of all, said Mr. Holmes, who reluctantly supported the new borrowing.

"It's going to take some time – this next session, the next one and maybe one more after that – before we reach a real solution," he said.