Truth Be Tolled

Accidents, try to change them it's impossible. The accidental reveals man.

--Pablo Picasso

A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong gives it a superficial appearance of being right.

--Thomas Paine, quoted by Bexar County Commissioner Tommy Adkisson at the press conference for TURF's MPO lawsuit

'National Corridor'

That is what TxDOT calls I-69 in their Tier One Environmental Impact Statement for the project. Here is the proposed map of that corridor from the statement:

Canada reacts to threat of oil seekers

Oil transport may be connected from U.S. to Canada through the Trans-Texas Corridor.
See Black Gold, North and South

From Associated Press

TORONTO - Canada will set aside 25.5 million acres of land in the north for use as two new conservation areas, a move aimed at staving off potential oil and other resource exploration in some regions.

The two protected areas in the Northwest territories will be among the largest in Canadian history, said federal Environment Minister John Baird.

The land — which is within Canada's boreal forest and covers as much land as 11 Yellowstone National Parks — is teeming with wildlife like bears, wolves, waterfowl and migratory songbirds.

The East Arm of Great Slave Lake will become a 8.3 million acre national park, while 15 million acres between the park and an existing wildlife refuge will be designated a conservation area managed by native groups.

Further northwest, 3.7 million acres of land near the Mackenzie River will be reserved for a national wildlife area.

Both areas are ecologically sensitive, but have been targeted by some resource companies due to the possibility of oil, gas and uranium deposits.

Baird said the government is "withdrawing massive areas from industrial development to protect some of the most impressive ecological and cultural wonders in the North for generations to come."

Steve Kallick, the Boreal Conservation Director of the Pew Environment Group, commended the government for taking major conservation action to rebalance the effects of global warming.

"This is one of the largest conservation actions in North American history," Kallick said.

"Canada's boreal forest is one of the most important ecosystems on the planet and its been neglected recently by conservationists, and it's been under tremendous pressure from resource development."

Activists describe Canada's boreal forest as the largest intact forest remaining on the planet.

Kallick said the government was careful not to interfere with large industrial projects.

The new conservation areas will not affect a planned pipeline down the MacKenzie River that will deliver gas to the United States. Imperial Oil, ConocoPhillips Co., Shell Canada and ExxonMobil Corp. — are partners in the project, along with the Aboriginal Pipeline Group, set up to represents First Nations' interests.

Press conference for TURF's MPO lawsuit yesterday

'Largest tax increase in Texas history'

By Jim Forsyth

From WOAI

Long time toll road opponent Lyle Larson says the proposal that the Metropolitan Planning Organization will vote on next month, to begin the process of building new toll lanes on US Highway 281 north of Loop 1604, amounts to the 'largest tax increase in the history of Texas,' and unlike other tax increases which are approved by elected representatives, because the MPO is unelected, there is nothing Texans can do to stop it, 1200 WOAI news reports.

The Bexar County Commissioner made his comments to the Bexar County Republican Men's Club, and later, to 1200 WOAI news.

"If the vote is successful to use toll equity to build the 281 project, I'm afraid there's nothing we're going to be able to do to stop it," he said.

And if the vote is to give the go-ahead to the 281 tolls, as Larson expects will happen, he warns that is just the beginning.

"Then, God knows what else they're going to toll. There's a lot of projects they're looking at."

Larson expressed a concern that the Republican Party in Texas will become known as 'the tolling party,' and that image will damage the party's ability to win future elections. He says the vast majority of Texans disapprove of the aggressive toll road building policy promoted by Governor Perry and Texas Department of Transportation Chairman Ric Williamson.

He also blasted the MPO for its 'secrecy' and said the unelected agency has a responsibility to lay out for the public the details of the contract agreement on the 281 tolls it will vote on December 3. TexDOT is using a legal ruse to avoid revealing the contents of the contract. It refers to the proposal as a 'draft,' while local officials have said the plan up for a vote next month as 'the final agreement.'

"There's a lot of things that are built into the contracts that are unaware of, especially when it comes to building other roads that would potentially compete with the toll lanes for capacity," he said.

Larson said if that language is in the 281 toll contract, it could prohibit the state from funding any improvements on Blanco Road, Stone Oak Parkway, of Bulverde Road, allowing those routes to deteriorate to make the toll lanes look more attractive to motorists.

1200 WOAI news revealed exclusively more than a month ago that the contract to build State Highway 130 from Marion to Georgetown allows the state to 'consider' lowing the speed limit on Interstate 35, to encourage more drivers to take the toll road, and fill the pockets of toll road contractor Cintra Zachry.

Larson warns that next month's vote of the unelected MPO is probably the last time toll roads can be avoided.

"The only people then that could stop this would be people at the upper level of state government," Larson said. "I don't see them doing that in the future."

Larson also revealed that in addition to the 17 cent a mile toll on the roughly four mile stretch, it will also cost you 50 cents to drive though the new Loop 1604/US 281 cloverleaf which is part of the project.

MPO a 'front' for toll road builders

By Jim Forsyth

From WOAI

A lawsuit filed in federal court today seeks to block the December 3 vote on building new toll lanes on US 281, claiming the Metropolitan Planning Organization, which will take the vote on whether to build the lanes is a front for businesses seeking to get rich on toll road contracts, 1200 WOAI news reports.

The lawsuit, filed by TURF, Texans United for Reform and Freedom, asks U.S. District Judge Fred Biery to block the December third vote until a lawsuit filed by TURF which seeks to dissolve the MPO can come to trial, a process that could take years.

“The MPO represents the business interest who want to build toll roads in Bexar County so they can reap huge profits,” TURF lawyer David Van Os said.

He said the MPO board, was specifically created to allow pro toll interests to have their way. He cited an incident in September, in which MPO chairwoman Shelia McNeil refused to place a proposal floated by anti toll State Representative David Liebowitz up for discussion, ruling Liebowitz, who is a member of the MPO’s transportation committee, to be out of order.

“These business interests and their political allies are manipulating the processes of MPO board procedures,” Van Os said.

Anti toll groups have long cited the fact that appointed officials, including Texas Department of Transportation District Engineer David Casteel, have full voting seats on the board. TexDOT Chairman Ric Williamson has led the push to build toll roads in Texas.

Terri Hall of TURF, David Van Os and David Leibowitz all appear in Truth Be Tolled

Adventures in spin

In an odd twist of synchronicity, I attended a focus group the other night for the San Antonio MPO on city transportation issues. The PR firm who extended the invitation my way apparently did not look me up beforehand--they could have found out exactly how I feel about our Metropolitan Planning Organization, and saved themselves the 20 bucks they kindly gave me for my time and trouble in the process.

However, it was an interesting experience, and I was happy for the opportunity to have my opinion included in the MPO's market research.

At the start of the meeting, there were four of us random average citizens there to participate. A fifth showed up nearly an hour late, after the transport service she relies on left her standing in the street waiting for acknowledgement of the appointment she had made with them earlier.

She was disabled. She and the rest of us were pretty clear that the lack of attractive and reliable public transportation was the number one issue facing our city.

Preserving the environment was the second. Safety was also a priority.

I said we need light rail. The moderator asked if I'd be willing to pay for it. I said I'd sooner pay for that than toll roads.

Any suggestion that congestion was a monumental problem was emphasized.

On the heels of talk of traffic snarls, we were each asked to rate ourselves on a scale of one to ten on our knowledge of transportation funding in the state of Texas. Having done a bit of research on that subject, I was generous and gave myself an 8 1/2. Everyone else was a one or two. The others were understandably not sure what to do about our funding issues when asked. I said we should index the gas tax for inflation and stop siphoning off the gas tax fund for other, unrelated projects.

Whew! That one dropped like a hot potato.

So if the MPO is actually interested in getting a representative cross-section of lawmakers, citizens, business owners and workers in order to better tailor transportation solutions for our needs, I applaud them.

Seems to me though, the easiest and most taxpayer-friendly way to find out how the general public views their transportation plans is to just put them to a real vote.

--D. F.

TxDOT unveils TTC-69

The draft environmental impact statement can be found here.

Selling off assets a mistake

By Michael A. Olivas

From the Houston Chronicle

The financial wizards of Wall Street are dancing themselves into a frenzy after discovering a golden opportunity right beneath their noses.

Like astronomers excited by a new celestial body, large investment houses are now sweeping the landscape with telescopes, hunting for attractive public assets that can be "privatized" through purchase or lease. From toll roads in Indiana to lotteries in Texas and more than a dozen states, all of our revenue-generating public assets are up for grabs.

Unless we stop the madness, we risk giving away key components of our public infrastructure at fire-sale prices.

Why should we care about who owns our highways, operates our lotteries or manages our public networks? That's the sly question posed to us by investment houses proffering bales of greenbacks to cash-strapped states throughout the country.

Perhaps the best reason to be wary of these megadeals is the scale of the fervor they have generated on Wall Street. If we've learned anything from the investor scandals of the past two decades, it's this: If a deal sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

Unless we stop the headlong privatization of public investments, we may wake up one day repeating Gertrude Stein's famous line: "There is no there there." But unlike Stein, we won't be talking only about Oakland — we'll be lamenting the barren balance sheets of our public treasuries.

Here are five reasons I believe we should rethink our stance toward privatization:

• Reason No. 1: Private interests are not driven to serve public needs.
There are two simple reasons why Wall Street wants to buy or lease state assets: They already exist, and they generate tons of cash. But in addition to paying down debt (in the case of a toll road, for example), these assets fund important public initiatives involving transportation, health, education and other essential government services. In Texas, to cite just one example, more than $1 billion collected through the Texas Lottery finances statewide education initiatives and medical research at the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston.

Arrangements such as these were carefully negotiated in the public arena, and it's doubtful if any of them could survive privatization. The private world lives by a simple credo: If it fails to deliver profit, it deserves to be eliminated. So, unless we resist the impulse to privatize, there's bad news ahead for Texas schoolchildren and researchers at UTMB-Galveston and for other worthy citizens and public needs nationwide.

And just where do we draw the line? Are state pension funds up for grabs, along with all of our state highway departments?

• Private companies are not guardians of public trust.
It's worth remembering how the Houston Astros opened their 2000 season in a spiffy new stadium named "Enron Field." The lesson is that companies come and go, and there are no guarantees that the purchasers or lessees of our public assets will perform any better than the likes of Enron, WorldCom or Tyco.

When our publicly elected officials perform badly, or criminally, voters at least have the opportunity to vote the bad guys out of office. But when we relinquish the control of our state assets to "outside entities," we are literally at their mercy.

• Beware public officials who resurface in private sectors.
During his 24-year tenure as a U.S. congressman and senator, Phil Gramm presided over numerous public initiatives in Texas. After leaving office, he resurfaced as one of the powerbrokers at UBS, the international brokerage house. Similarly, Kathleen Brown served as treasurer of California. She now works for Goldman Sachs and is spearheading an effort to lease the California lottery.

Ex-politicos are certainly entitled to earn a living, but there's something unsettling about powerful politicians moving into new roles where they can target public assets for lease or purchase. The easiest way to ensure a smooth transition from public to private life for these former politicians is to cut them off at the pass — and prevent the sale or lease of public assets that were created or operated during their tenures in office.

• States will never recoup their public investments.
By leasing its key tollroad to a foreign investment group, Indiana earned an instant windfall of nearly $4 billion. Despite the huge up-front payment, critics of the deal say that Indiana will never recoup the massive public investments that created and sustained the tollroad over the years. Private companies that pick the low-hanging fruit of public assets sustain zero start-up costs, are unburdened by government employees and their pensions and avoid the risks that taxpayers assumed when they voted to fund the project. This state of affairs has a name — "privateering" — and it's not in the public interest, since we are long past the point of provoking land rushes to "tame the frontier."

The ongoing benefits of our public assets belong to the taxpayers who created them — and not to international banks, U.S. private interests or former governmental officials cashing in on their connections.

• Beware a future that blurs public and private interests.
Building and maintaining a large public highway can involve eminent domain and financing supplied through tax-free bonds. These techniques are the preserve of politicians acting in the public interest, and they have no application in the private arena. After an investment house acquires a toll road, it's easy to imagine the board of directors voting to add new lanes — but only to serve drivers traveling to and from communities being developed by the firm and its investors. And if land needs to be condemned to create these new corridors, who gets to wield the power of eminent domain — an elected official, or the CEO of a major investment group?

Using information obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, The New York Times confirmed how companies are pursuing a concerted campaign to buy and lease large public assets, and are training their ranks to counter any voices of skepticism. But before we sell or lease the fruits of our public treasuries, a little skepticism may be a good thing.

Let's put the burden of persuasion and proof on those who would open their books, enter into full disclosure of public-private arrangements and fees and convince us that we should give them the keys to the public store.

I'll be thinking about these and other points the next time I attend a game at Enron Field, err, umm, make that Minute Maid Park.

Olivas is William B. Bates Distinguished Chair of Law at the University of Houston Law Center.