Money trail: Pro-toll MPO Chair had ties to Zachry

NOTE: Zachry is a partner in many toll deals that sell Texas freeways to private entities (using contracts called PPPs). McNeil is the former MPO Chair, the body that gives thumbs up or down on local toll projects and has a say in whether or not it'll be done using public private partnership (PPPs) contracts or not.

Report shows McNeil-Zachry ties

Greg Jefferson -
Web Posted: 08/21/2010 12:00 CDT

Judging from Sheila McNeil's latest campaign finance report, it turns out there really was no sunlight between herand Zachry Construction Corp., just as many East Siders had come to believe during her four years on the City Council.

But while they're close, they're not cozy these days. There's discord over McNeil's methods as she lined up financing for her long-shot — and losing — campaign against County Commissioner Tommy Adkisson in the Democratic primary.

Filed last month, the report shows $25,000 in contributions from H.B. Zachry Jr. after the March 2 contest. The magnate signed off on two checks to help clean up some of McNeil's campaign debt, which reportedly reached about $60,000 and included a handful of loans.

Her lenders certainly were close at hand.

Read the rest of the story here.

TransCanada threatens property owners over pipeline

Link to article here.

TransCanada Already Bullying Landowners in Nebraska

— By Kate Sheppard, Mother Jones


Fri Aug. 27, 2010 12:48 PM PDT

A Canadian oil giant wants to expand an already-massive pipeline to bring oil from the tar sands of Canada all the way down to the Gulf of Mexico. The US has yet to even approve the 1,980-mile TransCanada Keystone XL pipeline, but the company is already sending threatening letters to landowners in their pathway.

In a letter sent last month to a landowner in Nebraska provided to Mother Jones, the company warns that the landowner could be forced to surrender his or her property if the landowner doesn't consent to the pipeline construction on their property. The company invokes a Nebraska state statute to threaten eminent domain should homeowners turn down their offer of financial compensation for agreeing to let the pipeline cross their land:

In order to construct the pipeline, Keystone must acquire a permanent and temporary easement over your property. It is Keystone's strong preference to negotiate a voluntary transfer with each property owner. However, int eh event we cannot come to an agreement, Keystone will use eminent domain to acquire the easement, which is authorized pursuant to Nebraska Revised Statute 57-1101 et. Seq.


The letter goes on to offer a price to the landowners, which has been blacked out. It warns that this is the final letter, and gives the landowner just one month to respond. The company also offers to "provide compensation for any damages that occur during the course of construction including crop loss and any damages to fences, trees, or other improvements."

In case the landowner didn't get the threat the first time, the threat is repeated:

While we hope to acquire this property through negotiation, if we are unable to do so, we will be forced to invoke the power of eminent domain and will initiate condemnation proceedings against this property promptly after the expiration of this one month period.

This letter comes despite the fact that the project isn't even approved yet; in July, the State Department extended the review period for the pipeline by 90 days to give federal agencies additional time for comment. People who live in the region are justifiably outraged by the bullying from TransCanada before the oil giant even has the green light on the project.

The pipeline from Hardisty, Alberta, to Houston would pass through Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas. It has been the subject of plenty of debate already, and even more so in the wake of the giant oil disaster in the Gulf. Then there was yet another oil spill in Michigan last month, one that dumped hundreds of thousands of gallons of crude from the tar sands into the Talmadge Creek. That pipeline belongs to TransCanada rival Enbridge Energy, and certainly hasn't helped the public feel much better about the Keystone XL project (more on that here).

Environmental groups and the US EPA have raised concerns about the large amount of emissions from tar sands oil as compared to conventional sources. But there's a growing concern about the safety of the pipeline, which would cross 71 rivers and streams and the Ogalalla aquifer if it is completed.

The full letter, which was obtained by the National Wildlife Federation, is here.

Florida toll violators better pay up

Link to article here.

Toll violations in Central Florida: Expect to pay up sooner

Changes to toll violations in Central Florida take effect Sept. 1.

August 26, 2010|By Dan Tracy, ORLANDO SENTINEL
Motorists in Metro Orlando who do not pay their tolls face much smaller penalties than they used to, but they are about to get the bill sooner, too.

The Orlando Orange County Expressway Authority decided Wednesday that it will send out notices to violators after two unpaid tolls per month, rather than three, which was the old standard.

The change, which takes effect Sept. 1, could bring in an additional $725,000 annually to the agency, which owns and operates 105 miles of toll roads in Orange.


 
Violators are caught by camera, which takes a picture of the license plate of each vehicle that passes through a plaza without paying. That happens, on average, about 24,000 times a day.

People who do not pay after receiving a notice in the mail have a hold put on their tag registration, meaning they cannot get a new license without settling up with the authority.

Previously, toll scofflaws had their driver's license suspended and had to go to court, where they also faced heavy fines.

The agency changed the process last year after a series of Orlando Sentinel stories about how punitive the old system was. Before the change, motorists could lose their licenses for failing to pay as few as four tolls.

Now, the fine is 10 cents per violation, plus a $3 handling fee.

"This looks like a better system for our users," authority Chairman Walter Ketcham said. "That's why we opted to go for it."

Habitual offenders still are being referred to court, said David Wynne, manager of toll operations for the authority. Those are "the worst of the worst" who do not pay tolls and ignore requests for payment.

Toll violators cost the agency about $6 million a year.

The old penalty system came under scrutiny in April 2008, when a Sanford judge decided that an Osceola firefighter had been unfairly punished by Florida's Turnpike.

The judge not only overturned the $3,000 fine and license suspension, but also terminated the turnpike's ability to go after toll violators in Seminole County, where the turnpike operates a portion of S.R. 417. That ruling eventually was overturned.

The turnpike also sends out notices after two missed tolls.

DMN: Bill White a bit sharper on transportation issues

Bill White a bit sharper on transportation issues 

9:19 AM Thu, Aug 26, 2010
Rodger Jones/Editorial Writer

The bosses asked me to bone up on the governor's race and transportation for an editorial that ran today. Bill White's people put him on the phone with me, and I had a chat with Perry spokesman Mark Miner. I also pored over both of their answers on the DMN's voter's guide (which hasn't gone on line yet).

My take:

-- White has essentially the same message as in the spring, but it's a little sharper, and he seems better prepped on the politics of options and financing. One frustration is that he still will not get into individual taxes or fees that should be available for a local-option vote, and he won't get off of the tiresome subject of the Trans-Texas Corridor. The TTC was one of KBH's pet attack issues. It didn't get her anywhere, but it may poll well for White's people. (More on that in a separate blog.)
-- Perry has a pat hand: No new taxes, White is a taxer, government has to tighten its belt, projects have to be prioritized. Miner said: "Everything that people say needs to be built aren't going to get built." Message: the important things will get done, and other stuff will have to wait.

Miner said a local-option bill is "taking the easy way out." Why not let voters have their say, since they might think certain unfunded projects are important enough to get built? "Gov. Perry is against raising taxes."


As our edit said, the status quo guarantees more tolls. Tolls have become a proxy for gas taxes, and they hit some wallets a lot harder. Look at the NTTA's toll schedule. The Richardson  resident who works in Las Colinas pays $8 a day to commute round trip on the GBT.

Why doesn't he live closer to work or take free roads? 1) Consider realities of the job market. My nephew moved to Dallas less than five years ago to do corporate recruiting. So far he has officed out of Addison , CityPlace, Irving, Richardson and now Southlake. 2) Toll roads are built along corridors that people need to travel. Alternatives take time out of your day.

With money tight out of Austin and Washington, the region has little choice but to rely on tolls. The NTTA says building the Bush as a toll road sped up its construction by 10 years.

If you ask politicians about tolls, they say that planners need "all the tools." Ask the toll-payers about that. They'll tell you that the real tools are the politicians.

Full disclosure: White is somewhat aligned with the DMN editorial position of many years, which is to let voters decide. And we've been bullish on using new money to extend the rail transit network. We have also endorsed Sen. John Carona's call for a 10-cent tax increase on motor fuels.

Irony: Our editorial was kind to White and rough on Perry, but the governor's people probably came away more than satisfied. The accompanying graphic excerpted their positions, and Perry was first alphabetically. He's got to be loving the fact that the page showcased this quote from him: "I do not favor a plan that would include raising local taxes."

I'm attaching a transcript with a Q&A I had with White. I sent the same questions to Perry's camp, but didn't get answers back. I deleted a portion of the conversaion I had with White on the TTC. It'll be in another blog.

I'm also attaching the two candidates' answers to the DMN voters guide questions.

Interview with Bill White:

White's opener: Long-term planning for our state requires leadership from the governor. Leadership is more than passing a law or giving a speech for selling one's own ideas. One of many flaws with the Trans-Texas Corridor idea of Rick Perry's was a top-down push rather than involving stakeholders including local elected officials, the business community and transportation professionals, as well as members of the Legislature, in crafting that plan. ...

As a candidate for governor, I want to give a clear sense of direction that leadership is not dictating the details of a long-term transportation plan. ...

In Houston, we found that we improved mobility in the community by using the best ideas, setting a course of direction, and they crafting a plan with broad-based participation.

Q. What's your position on allowing metro areas to vote on raising new transportation money locally, and what fees and taxes ought to be made available?

A. Current state law confines local government to raising property taxes to pay for transportation infrastructure. Local voters should have more options than that. I don't think the state should be in the business of binding the options that local voters desire.

Q. Is there a list of potential option you have considered?

I don't want to have a list that limits things, but I have heard many different people, including Sen. Carona, Sen. Williams, Sen. Watson, and local elected officials, including those in the metroplex, talk about different options. It would be fair to say my bias would be to sign a bill with any option that local officials wanted the voters to consider.

It's a philosophy of government. Rick Perry has tended to concentrate power in Austin. I like to see local voters have more power and options.

Q. What's your position on raising the statewide motor fuels tax?

A. That wouldn't be on my agenda. We have to have -- end the diversions over time of the current motor fuels tax. That's the first step.

Q. Would locally raised money be enough to meet transportation needs, or would metro areas need more revenue out of Austin?

A. Let's start with the revenue that we have in Austin through motor fuels taxation and federal formula funding.

For projects of regional significance, I think we will be able to stretch those dollars by more grants to local folks within the regions who are capable of managing all that project and reducing the duplicative overhead between TxDOT and those regions.

For projects of statewide significance -- such as expanding I-35 -- those should take the high priority for new-start funding by the state. So there are projects of statewide significance-- the de-bottlenecking of I-35 being the classic case, and another one being the extension of the interstate highway system to the Lower Rio Grande Valley -- that have statewide significance. Those should be funded in part by federal funds and new start money funded from traditional sources.

Q. Should the state gas tax ever be raised?

A. I think the place to start on that is to phase out the diversions. I'm not one to say what happens in five, 10, 20 years in the future of the state.

There are many people who realize that cars are becoming are more and more fuel efficient -- and they should become more and more fuel efficient. So the mix between motor fuels taxes and other sources of revenue I can't predict in the future. But I'll say this: We need to have a broad, bi-partisan expert panel develop such a plan and those kind of projects.

Q. The D-FW area is relying on tolls to build nearly every major highway project. Do you favor more of this in the future?

A. I would defer entirely to the priorities of local government, with the approval of voters on how they fund locally managed transportation infrastructure.

Unlike [late Transportation Commission Chairman Ric] Williamson and the cabal of investment bankers and private concerns, I wouldn't be pushing tolls roads as the solution.

Q. Local officials say they have no choice but to turn to tolls because of the lack of highway money. How would you help them do things otherwise, if that were their wish?

A. I would remove some of the impediments of the alternatives they could offer to voters, and we would make more predictable and direct grants to regional organizations where their priorities could be determined within those regions, and the projects could be managed within those regions, rather than have the duplicative overhead taken out in phases between the transportation professionals and the engineers at each level of government.

Q. Do you support creation of more state borrowing programs for highways (and we've had a bunch in recent years)?

A. Debt is appropriate if it is approved by voters and there is a dedicated source of funding that does not cannibalize needed maintenance. This occurs routinely for generations in Texas for local transportation infrastructure. So for example, in Houston and Harris County, as bonds to build roads have been paid off, then voters have authorized new debt as old bonds are paid off without raising taxes. There's a portion of the available funds for property taxes that's dedicated to capital improvements and a portion dedicated to operations and maintenance.

Most local jurisdictions, when they are managed well, maintain those percentages in accordance with a plan. In contrast, according to Ms. Delisi [Transportation Commission Chairman Deidre Delisi], the bonds that TxDOT has issued will result in the cannibalization and reduction of required maintenance, and that's harvesting and not planning.

From the DMN voters guide questionnaire:

Q. How would you characterize the financial needs and condition of Texas' roadway system?

Bill White: Texas' transportation system is broken, as a massive recent audit confirmed. Texas must have a long-term transportation plan in which local communities have a voice. Priorities should be set from the bottom up and not the top down. Planning should be multi-modal. The Perry Administration was diverted from effective long-term planning because of its preoccupation with the Trans Texas Corridor. Lack of planning has caused enormous bottlenecks and traffic congestion, which hurts Texas families and the state's ability to attract new businesses.

Rick Perry: For years, Washington has short-changed Texas taxpayers, sending back around 70 cents for road construction for every dollar in motor fuels taxes that Texans send to Washington. We have the lowest rates of return on our dollar compared to any other state. This is due to Washington's failure to uphold a system that is fair, not driven by pork and earmarks for powerful congressional members. Texas also currently diverts a large portion of dollars intended for transportation to other state programs. These diversions must end. Despite these challenges, Texas has found innovative ways to build the roads we need, building more roadway miles than any other state in the last 10 years.

Q. What ways of generating new transportation revenue would you support -- taxes, tolls, borrowing, fees, other? Please be specific.

Bill White: I do not support tolling existing roadways but support allowing local entities, with voter approval, various options to fund local transportation and mobility projects. Before any new funding plan is enacted, careful effort and study must be made to look for efficiencies within TXDOT and its budget.

Rick Perry: First of all, we need to get more of our money back from Washington D.C. for road construction. Texas has for years been short-changed by Washington, receiving only 70 cents back for road construction for every dollar in motor fuels taxes. Secondly, we need to end diversions of state money and put dollars collected from gas taxes into building roads. Last session, we had some success with ending diversions, sending more than $300 million back to TxDOT, but next session we need to do more - we need to end all diversions from our state transportation fund.

Q. Do you favor a proposal to allow counties to call elections on local taxes and fees that could be used for transportation projects?

Bill White: I support giving local governments the opportunity, with the consent of their voters, to raise funds for transportation projects.

Rick Perry: I do not favor a plan that would include raising local taxes. Texans already pay a lot of money on a state, local and federal level on taxes that do not go to road construction as they are intended to. Before any other options are considered, we need to end diversions and get more of our money back from Washington D.C.

White to let voters decide on gas tax hike, road funding


Link to article here.

Of course, Perry (and the reporter) leaves out the fact that he's purposely starved the gas tax to push toll roads (and hand Texas highways over to foreign companies who charge 75 cents a mile to drive TX roads) or that he's jettisoned Texas taxpayers into MOUNDS of debt for toll roads to be paid back with interest at a much higher rate of taxation than a gas tax increase. For just the first $6 billion of the $12 in STATE road debt, it will cost taxpayers $21 billion to pay back. That's ALL Texans, not just those who actually use the toll roads (they'll pay an extra tax on top of this one) as Perry would have you believe.

White won't rule out debt, taxes to pay for roads

By APRIL CASTRO Associated Press Writer © 2010 The Associated Press

Aug. 17, 2010, 6:35PM

AUSTIN, Texas — Democratic candidate for governor Bill White on Tuesday wouldn't rule out higher debt, tax increases or more seizures of private property to build new roads and relieve congestion on the state's aging highways.
In an exclusive interview with The Associated Press, White acknowledged the need to increase capacity on the state's roads and criticized Gov. Rick Perry's policies and proposals, but he struggled to offer specifics on raising the money to address the problem.

The topic illustrates a stark difference between the two candidates, with Perry flatly refusing any tax hikes — even those approved by voters — and White leaving higher taxes up for consideration.



Perry spokesman Mark Miner said Perry "has been very clear ... raising taxes is not on the table. A better way to manage government is to cut costs and use fiscal responsibility."

White said Perry's administration had been "fiscally irresponsible" in borrowing money to pay for roads, but he said it might be OK for local governments to take on more debt if voters agreed to it.

"I believe that local voters have a lot of wisdom and the fact is that for generations, in Texas communities large and small, voters have approved and sometimes disapproved bond issues to pay for transportation infrastructure," White said.

When asked whether he would support an increase in the state's gas tax, the former Houston mayor said he would "work with the legislative leadership to address a long-run transportation plan."

But working with the Legislature on transportation funding hasn't always been easy.

The House and Senate engaged in a bitter dispute during the most recent regular legislative session over $2 billion in transportation bonds. Angry Republican senators said it was preferable to quit and let Perry call the Legislature back into a special session, which he later did.

One senator threatened a filibuster over House legislation because it didn't allow certain counties to approve increases in gas taxes and other fees to raise money for road projects he said were desperately needed.

In the subsequent special session, lawmakers approved the road bonds, but blocked Perry from continuing to make contracts for privately built toll roads. A disappointed Perry vowed that improving the state's transportation would continue to be a top priority.

White wouldn't rule out more deals with private road builders, saying he didn't "want to tie the hands of local voters on the kinds of financing they want" for transportation projects.

But as governor, White said his first order of business on transportation would be ensuring lawmakers stop diverting millions of taxpayer dollars, mostly from the state's 20-cent per gallon gas tax, which was intended to pay for new roads. In the current budget, lawmakers diverted $1.15 billion from highway funds to cover other needs in the budget.

"The citizens of this state need to see a plan for phasing out the current diversions of the motor fuel taxes," White said. "Those taxes were imposed for a particular purpose and have been diverted for other purposes."

The diversions amount to a fraction of the $315 billion experts say will be needed over the next two decades to prevent congestion from getting worse and to keep roads safe.

Asked if a higher gas tax would be an option to pay for new roads once the diversions are halted, White remained noncommittal.

"I suppose it depends on how long I'm governor and the views of the Legislature," White said. "It can't be done in a year, but it probably can be done in a period of 10 years."

White said the state should use more grants to allow local entities to implement their own transportation ideas — even if that means more voter-approved tax hikes to repay more debt — rather than the Texas Department of Transportation enforcing their own plans.

"Under Rick Perry, he's consolidated power in Austin over school districts, cities, counties and regional planning organizations," White said. "There are effective regional organizations that are in better position to assess regions' needs than having that dictated from above."

White also deferred to local authorities on toll roads.

"There will be no topdown land grab like the Trans-Texas Corridor," he said. "We will defer to local communities concerning what works best for them."

White sharply criticized Perry's failed proposal to create a massive, almost $200 billion network of toll roads and high-speed rail, saying it went too far, did not adequately compensate land owners and should not have allowed land to be taken from one private owner and turned over to a private developer. Still, he wouldn't rule out condemning more land to build more roads.

"The problem with the Trans-Texas Corridor is they seized large amounts of land, more than was needed for the actual right of way and turned it over to private businesses," White said. Government land seizure should only be used as a last resort for traditional public purposes, he said.

Editorial: End diversions to highway fund

Link to article here.

End diversions to fix highway fund

Express-News Editorial Board -
Web Posted: 08/29/2010 12:00 CDT

The Texas Department of Transportation is willing to consider all options to raise revenue and reverse a funding shortage for road construction and maintenance. That was the message Amadeo Saenz Jr., TxDOT's executive director, delivered to the San Antonio Mobility Coalition recently, Express-News staff writer Jeorge Zarazua reported.
That shortfall is huge and growing. Due to the weak economy and increases in automobile fuel efficiency, revenues from the gas tax — the largest funding source for the highway fund — fell for the first time in fiscal year 2008. Last year, they fell again for a second year.

Increasing the motor fuels sales tax and motor vehicle registration fees are among the possible alternatives TxDOT is considering. So is a controversial measure that would assess fees on motorists based on the number of miles they drive. Nothing can be done without action by the Legislature.

Read the rest of the editorial here.

Politicos now want a driveway tax to fund roads


Link to article here.

I hope I'm not alone in thinking these people have lost their minds. Sadly, the Dallas City Council has also floated this idea and Austinites are already paying this type of tax.

Posted on Wed, Aug. 18, 2010

Mission City Council approves 'driveway tax' to fund roads

By BRAD COOPER
The Kansas City Star

Mission homeowners and businesses are going to pay for roads in a new way that officials believe breaks ground in the Midwest.

Instead of relying on sales and property taxes for roads, the city will start charging fees based on how much traffic properties produce.

The City Council on Wednesday night approved a new fee charging every homeowner $72 a year and small businesses $3,558 a year beginning in December.

Larger businesses that generate lots of traffic, such as Mission Bank, could pay $5,659 a year. A drive-thru fast food restaurant could pay $12,200 a year. Target could pay as much as $64,750 annually.

City officials and some local experts believe the fee, sometimes called a “driveway tax,” would be the first in Kansas and possibly in the entire Midwest.

The new fee is aimed at properties that produce the most traffic and put the most wear and tear on roads. Big-box stores are going to be charged more than residential homes, which don’t generate as much traffic.

It affects roughly 5,650 developed or developable properties, including churches, schools and government buildings that are tax-exempt but still generate traffic.

Engineering formulas estimate that a single-family home generates about 9 1/2 vehicle trips a day. The Target store, meanwhile, generates about 8,500 trips a day. McDonald’s is predicted to produce 2,700 trips.

The fee is expected to raise $1.2 million a year to help finance $38 million in road improvements during the next 10 years. It also will help fund a new express bus service between Overland Park and the Country Club Plaza that will run through Mission.

City officials said they desperately needed the money for deteriorating streets. But some residents said it’s a bad time economically for what’s essentially a tax increase.

The fee has had limited use across the country, but has become popular in Oregon, where it’s been adopted in at least 18 cities.

The fee is gradually spreading nationwide because it’s a more direct way to pay for road costs by charging the people and businesses that create the most traffic.

DFW toll bridge a flop

NTTA toll bridge: Inflated projections, increased congestion

Toll Bridge Doesn't See Much Traffic

Fewer drivers than expected are using Lewisville Lake Toll Bridge

8/2/10

By OMAR VILLAFRANCA
NBCDFW.com
Copyright 2010

There's a fast way to get across Lake Lewisville, but it's not by boat, and it's not free.

The Lewisville Lake Toll Bridge opened up one year ago this month. The bridge, operated by the North Texas Tollway Authority, spans over Lewisville Lake and runs east and west. The lanes connect Lake Dallas with Lakewood Village.
Online statistics show that drivers aren't using the bridge as often as the NTTA had projected. From January to May of 2010, the NTTA projected that about 2.17 million drivers would use the bridge. In reality, 1 million fewer vehicles -- about 1.15 million drivers -- actually used the bridge in that time period.

NTTA spokeswoman Sherita Coffelt said it could be because many drivers don't know how about the bridge.


So far, drivers have mixed feelings on the 1.7 mile stretch of toll road, which was billed as a major traffic reliever for Denton County.

"I like it," said Merideth Burnett, of Hickory Creek. "It cost too much, but I like it."

The toll for the bridge is $1 for drivers with toll tags or $1.50 if for drivers using Zip Cash.

Several drivers said they don't use the bridge but have noticed an increase in traffic congestion where the bridge and Interstate 35 merge.

"It's not been good ever since they opened this up," said Lisa Fair, of Corinth. "It's backed up in every direction and (has) a lot more cars than it used to have."

Pension fund buys toll operations

Link to article here.

NOTE: Rick Perry's son, Griffin, works for one of the players below, UBS. Perry also appoints the board that invests Texas public employee retirement funds who have invested millions in toll roads recently. It's a tainted web he weaves with quite a money trail to follow. Increasingly, pension funds, particularly public pension funds, are investing in risky toll road operations. When toll revenues are dipping globally, and with public pension funds needing bailouts, it defies logic to see yet more risky moves with retirees nest-eggs.

Canada Pension Agrees to Buy Intoll for $3 Billion

By Angus Whitley and Doug Alexander - Aug 27, 2010

Canada Pension Plan Investment Board agreed to buy Intoll Group for A$3.44 billion ($3 billion) to gain stakes in toll roads in Toronto and Sydney in the pension fund’s largest purchase.

The offer from Canada’s second-biggest pension manager values Intoll shares at A$1.52 each, 36 percent higher than before an initial approach was announced on July 15, the Sydney- based company said in a statement today.

The deal gives the Canadian fund a 30 percent stake in the 407 ETR near Toronto, and follows its failure earlier this year to buy toll-road operator Transurban Group. Intoll shares had fallen 9.3 percent since being created by the split of Macquarie Infrastructure Group in January and the opening takeover proposal.

“It’s good for shareholders to realize value,” said Xu Han, an analyst at UBS AG in Sydney. “The market is pretty skeptical about long-range infrastructure investments.”

Intoll agreed to the bid after Canada Pension increased the Australian dollar component of the offer. The July 15 bid had been 23 Australian cents and C$1.186 for each Intoll share. The value of that proposal had slipped to A$1.495 from A$1.535 at today’s foreign-exchange prices, Intoll said.


Shares Rise

Intoll shareholders including Abu Dhabi Investment Authority and Lazard Asset Management Ltd. can also accept stock in Canada Pension’s bidding vehicle and 22.4 cents cash a share, Intoll said. The shares today climbed 1.4 percent, the most in six weeks, to A$1.475 at the 4:10 p.m. local time close in Sydney trading.

Canada Pension will finance the takeover of Intoll with existing cash resources, according to a statement.

Canada Pension is betting it’s better placed than equity investors to profit from the toll roads as it seeks to match its long-term liabilities with assets set to deliver steady returns in economies that weathered the global recession.

Canada Pension’s joint offer for Transurban in November and a revised bid in May collapsed after they were both rejected and co-bidder Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan sold out.

Canada Pension has been increasing investments in infrastructure in the last five years, and at the end of June had about C$6.1 billion worth of utilities in its C$129.7 billion investment portfolio, according to filings.

Australian Assets

Canada Pension owns a stake in Australia’s broadcast transmission provider Broadcast Australia and all of Macquarie Communications Infrastructure Group, which the fund bought last year for about C$1.52 billion.

The fund’s other infrastructure assets include stakes in British gas distributor Wales and West Utilities, U.S. electrical utility Puget Sound Energy and Chile’s electrical transmission company Transelec S.A.

Canada Pension has also been increasing its private equity investments and last month bid about $4.5 billion to buy British auto-parts firm Tomkins Plc with Onex Corp., Canada’s biggest publicly traded buyout firm.

Worldwide, companies have announced $203 billion of takeovers in August, including Intel Corp.’s purchase of security-software maker McAfee Inc. and BHP Billiton Ltd.’s $40 billion hostile bid for Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan Inc. Those deals are set to make this month the busiest of the year, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

Westlink M7

Intoll was formed in January after Macquarie Infrastructure split into two in a bid to buoy valuations. As well as the stake in the 108-kilometer Canadian highway, Intoll owns 25 percent of the Westlink M7, a 40-kilometer toll road in Sydney’s west. Intoll said today it swung to a profit of A$1.51 billion in the 12 months to June 30 from a year-earlier loss of A$1.7 billion.

“The listed market has significantly undervalued Intoll stapled securities over an extended period of time,” Chairman Paul McClintock said in the statement.

To boost Intoll’s value, McClintock said the company had considered a dual listing on the Toronto Stock Exchange as well as buying an additional 10 percent of the 407 ETR.

“It is not clear that these strategies would deliver the same certain return of value,” he said in the statement. Intoll directors recommend shareholders opt for Canada Pension Plan’s cash offer, he said.

A completed sale of the business to the Canadian fund would mark an exit for Macquarie Group Ltd., Australia’s largest investment bank and the biggest shareholder in Intoll, according to Bloomberg data.

States turn to tolls to fund roads

Link to article here.

NOTE: Peter Samuel makes his living off toll roads and so does HNTB. Both seem to want states to continue to starve the gas tax so they can force more toll roads, particularly using public private partnerships (PPPs) that give toll operators monopolies and guaranteed profits that charge toll rates of 75 cents a mile like two deals in Dallas. The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association has it right, tolling existing roads and bridges is tantamount to DOUBLE TAXATION.

States turn to tolls to fund roads
By Larry Copeland, USA TODAY
August 3, 2010

Toll roads are increasingly emerging as the go-to strategy for states and metro areas eager to build and maintain expressways amid a recession that has battered government budgets.
"There's more interest in tolling today than there has been" in more than three decades, says Jack Finn, national director of toll services with the Kansas City-based consulting firm HNTB.

A traditional main source of road funding — gasoline taxes — has eroded as motorists drive fewer miles and more fuel efficient vehicles. The Obama administration opposes increasing the 18.4-cent-per-gallon federal share of the gas tax. It has been at that level since 1993. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood says that public-private partnerships and tolling are additional ways to support transportation projects.


"There is something of a trend for local governments, especially state, but also counties and in some cases, metropolitan areas, to do tolling," says Peter Samuel, editor of TollRoadsNews.com, a newsletter on tolling. "It's resistance to raising the gas tax."

 

GAS TAX: A break at the pump
OPINION: Gas tax key to ending oil addiction
Local governments are getting the message. "There's a paucity of money at the state and federal level," says Lloyd Robinson, a Fredericksburg, Va., official working on a new toll road near Interstate 95. "If we are going to help ourselves, we need to raise more revenue. One of the ways to do that is to have toll roads."

Among recent projects:

• The governors of Illinois and Indiana in June signed an agreement to move forward with the Illiana Expressway, a toll road that would connect Interstate 65 in Indiana with Interstates 55 and 57 in Illinois.

• Authorities in Louisville and southern Indiana recently said tolls could generate more than half the $4.1 billion needed to build two new bridges across the Ohio River and refurbish a major highway interchange. Drivers currently pay no toll.

• Tolling is funding three major road projects under construction or planned in the Washington, D.C., area: the Inter-County Connector, an 18-mile, 6-lane limited access road in Maryland; four new lanes on a 14-mile stretch of the Capital Beltway, and converting two express lanes to three on 28 miles of the I-395/I-95 freeway, both in Northern Virginia.

• North Carolina, which began construction last year on its first modern toll road, is spending more than $6 million studying how to pay for much-needed improvements to a 182-mile stretch of Interstate 95 in the state. "We have to wait for the study to be completed so we can have an educated conversation about whether tolling is an option," says Greer Beaty, spokeswoman for the state transportation department.

• Birmingham, Ala., Mayor William Bell is considering tolling as a way to reopen a 74-year-old bridge over Lake Purdy that's been closed since December. Under a $4 million plan, a private company would rebuild Grants Mill Road bridge as a toll bridge at no cost to the city.

• Transportation officials in the Fredericksburg, Va., area last month moved ahead with a plan to build a new I-95 interchange and toll road. Tolls would pay about half the $300 million cost, says Robinson, administrator of the Fredericksburg Area Metropolitan Planning Organization.

• States are pressing Washington to change federal rules that limit their ability to toll on interstate highways. "In the last two or three months, there's been a real surge of interest in this topic," says transportation policy consultant David Hartgen, of the University of North Carolina-Charlotte.

"Public officials are coming to the realization that building the interstates was the easy part," says Patrick Jones, executive director and CEO of the International Bridge, Tunnel and Turnpike Association. "It's going to cost way more to repair and rehabilitate it, and the funds are simply not available."

Tolls for the new or proposed projects vary: 25 cents per mile during rush hour on the first section of the Inter-County Connector; $3 each way across the bridges in Louisville, and $1 on the Fredericksburg road.

New toll projects usually generate fierce opposition. In Louisville, toll opponents staged rush-hour protests. "We are opposed to tolls on existing bridges," says Shawn Reilly, co-founder of Say No to Bridge Tolls. The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, a trucking group with about 154,000 members, also opposes adding tolls on existing roads and bridges. "We consider that double taxation," spokeswoman Norita Taylor says.

TxDOT uses eminent domain to benefit private firms

Link to article here.

TxDOT use of eminent domain benefits private firms


by DAVID SCHECHTER

WFAA-TV - Dallas
Posted on August 2, 2010 at 10:08 PM

BEDFORD — The Texas Department of Transportation  is using its power to condemn private land so it can embark on a massive rebuild of Highway 183, also known as Airport Freeway.

The $2.1 billion project is called the North Tarrant Express (NTE). It will offer a mix of free lanes and toll lanes. For 50 years, toll profits will go to a private company.

The power of eminent domain lets TxDOT compensate landowners for taking the property it needs, and it is already staking its claim to more than 300 pieces of private property standing in the way.

But some people are raising questions about using the government's power to condemn land for the benefit of a private company.

In Bedford, the NTE will push all the way to the front door of Rex Lee's Vietnamese restaurant, slicing right through the Chili's next door. Lee’s landlord wants to move his restaurant within the mall, but Lee estimates that will cost him $200,000.

What makes the NTE unique is the use of private companies to finance 75 percent of the cost. In exchange, a Spanish company called Cintra can charge tolls for 52 years. That means private companies directly benefit from the state's power to take private land.

"First and foremost, this is still a TxDOT project. We're involved every day in the management of this project, and we will be for 52 years,” said TxDOT spokesman Tony Hartzell.

Attorney Kevin Maguire is an expert in eminent domain at the law firm of Strasburger & Price. "I think all Texans need to be vigilant to make sure that we are not delegating the power of eminent domain to third parties of any nationality,” he said.

Maguire says there is no evidence of that -- yet. But he says property owners need to know their rights when going up against TxDOT.

And even renters like Rex Lee may be entitled to compensation when the NTE forces them to move.

But for a small business owner affected by the uncertainty of a giant transportation project there are some concerns you can't put a dollar figure on.

"You think about it at night, before you go to bed," Lee said, "so  it's a little bit of stress involved.”

TV ad slams Perry's Trans Texas Corridor

Link to article below here.

Check out the "Hands Off Our Land" web site here.




See TURF & TxDOT's response in this Austin News 8 TV report here.

____________________________________________________________________________
New TV commercial criticizes Rick Perry over Trans-Texas Corridor

Houston lawyer pays for latest ad from Democratic group, Back to Basics PAC.

By Jason Embry

AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF

Updated: 9:58 a.m. Wednesday, Aug. 11, 2010

Published: 11:41 p.m. Tuesday, Aug. 10, 2010

Houston trial lawyer Steve Mostyn will open a new front in his election-year war against Gov. Rick Perry today by launching a television commercial that criticizes Perry's pursuit of the Trans-Texas Corridor.

Mostyn is fast becoming the pre-eminent donor in Texas Democratic politics and a key player in the race for governor. He has put more than $2 million into Democratic causes and campaigns in this election cycle and appears poised to spend several million more.

Much of that money has gone to the Back to Basics Political Action Committee, which has already aired two statewide television commercials critical of the governor.

In the group's third ad, which will launch statewide today, a rancher says Perry "would bulldoze half a million acres of private land — and give it to a Spanish company to build toll roads and let the company set the tolls. When lawmakers tried to stop him, Perry vetoed the law."


The 500,000-acre figure is a reference to early plans for the Trans-Texas Corridor, a long-range plan for 4,000 miles of cross-state tollways, passenger and freight rail lines, and utilities that Perry first laid out in 2002.

The corridor ran into considerable criticism in rural Texas, and members of Perry's administration long ago, even while they were actively developing an Interstate 35 corridor plan, admitted that nothing close to that 4,000 miles would ever be built.

Later, in January 2009, transportation officials declared that the corridor concept was dead.

A few legal remnants of the plan are still on the books, and the state is still working on Interstate 69 from the Rio Grande Valley to Texarkana, which was a key part of the corridor. But the current plans for I-69 are vastly different from what the corridor plan envisioned, Texas Department of Transportation spokesman Chris Lippincott said.

"We're not going to develop Trans-Texas Corridor projects," Lippincott said.

Cintra , a Spanish company, never had a contract to build every road in the corridor, Lippincott said. Also, he said a private company would never have been able to set tolls because the state Transportation Commission would have had final say.

Back to Basics director Clifton Walker said Perry could try to revive portions of the corridor if voters re-elect him.

"Our land, homes and family farms just aren't safe with Rick Perry as governor," Walker said.

Back to Basics has relied heavily on Mostyn's money to pay for statewide television ads knocking Perry for taxpayer spending on his western Travis County rental home and on his 2007 attempt to require schools to offer a human papillomavirus vaccine.

The group's latest ad buy cost about $900,000.

Democratic gubernatorial nominee Bill White said recently that he isn't coordinating with Back to Basics. But if the group's ads are effective, they could prove a tremendous benefit to White: The spots would bruise Perry without costing White any of his own campaign money.

Perry spokesman Mark Miner dismissed the ad.

"Baseless attacks from Bill White's front groups aren't going to solve problems," Miner said.

Can transportation survive politics?


Link to article here.

Carona out, Williams in
By Terri Hall
Houston Examiner
August 8, 2010

Speculation is swirling as to what prompted Texas State Senator John Carona to dump his chairmanship of the Senate Transportation and Homeland Security Committee and land as the new chair of the Business and Commerce Committee. Lt. Governor David Dewhurst promptly installed Senator Tommy Williams as the new Chair of the Senate Transportation Committee and there are already complaints that he's too close to Governor Perry and won't oppose Perry's controversial toll road agenda...at least not in the way Carona did.

First of all, Carona criticized Governor Rick Perry's penchant for selling off Texas highways to private corporations in deals called Comprehensive Development Agreements (also known as Public Private Partnerships or PPPs), insisting they were the most expensive way to fund roads (at 75 cents a MILE in tolls, he's absolutely right about that). He also pointed out it's a myth that Texans won't have to take the toll roads when nearly all new lanes and new roads in Texas are going to be tolled. He rightly declared it will be near impossible NOT to pay this new toll tax.

Carona was also a vocal advocate for a statewide gas tax increase, and when the Governor dug in his heels to starve the gas tax in order to push the most expensive option, toll roads, especially PPPs that hand our public infrastructure to Perry's cronies in half century sweetheart deals, Carona tried a local option gas tax decided by voters instead. Both have failed to get any traction. Though there are a host of reasons NOT to support ANY tax increases for transportation (for reasons we'll address in a moment), the obvious alternative to a massive network of toll roads is to address the gas tax which hasn't been raised since 1991. Some argue, well, I have to pay a gas tax increase, but I can avoid paying a toll. However, that's not the case. The way these new-fangled toll deals under Perry et al are structured, we ALL pay for the toll roads, and then have to pay AGAIN every time we use it. Even worse, there are many toll projects that slap toll taxes on existing roads we've already built and paid for, like parts of 290 and Hwy 281. Few of these projects are toll viable and self-sustaining (paid for by just those who use the toll road).

In fact, according to testimony in a joint hearing February 2, 2010, all the remaining toll projects on the books are NOT toll viable and ALL need taxpayer subsidies paid for by you and I (which equals hundreds of toll projects). Take the stimulus money as an example. TxDOT proposed that 70% of it go to toll roads. Prop 14 money is also being used to prop-up losing toll projects. Ditto for gas taxes and other sources of public funds that have become available since the push to toll roads began. All could be used to build FREEways, but Perry and our politicians continue to choose to borrow and spend us into an unsustainable system of debt-ridden toll roads that too few can afford to use which will eventually require massive bailouts (either on the front end, the back end or both) by ALL of us.

When the cost goes from 1-2 cents a mile under a gas tax road system to 25-75 cents a mile for toll roads, the most affordable option is gas tax, hands down. A 10 cent gas tax increase would cost about $100 a year on average (based on 20 MPG and driving 20,000 miles a year) versus $2,000-$3,000 a year on average to take just ONE toll road on a regular basis. Given the fact that these deals also have non-compete agreements that either penalize or prohibit the expansion of free roads surrounding toll roads, toll roads GUARANTEE congestion on free lanes, which means if you ever hope to get out of congestion, you're going to have to pay this new toll tax. Most every major metro area (and some not so metro areas) in the state has virtually EVERY road project slated to be tolled. As we've been told for years now, there is no money for "free" roads anymore. Politicians have abused our gas taxes and continue to raid what's left of them to build toll roads, double taxing Texans.

How to fund roads WITHOUT raising taxes

First, anyone who understands economics knows a tax increase during an economic downturn only serves to hurt economic growth and recovery. So now is NOT the time to be talking about a gas tax increase. Second, when the Legislature and Congress have habitually raided the gas tax and spend upwards of 40% of it on things other than roads, no taxpayer in his/her right mind would go for a gas tax increase that will only get further abused. Lawmakers MUST end gas tax diversions if they want to proceed with any discussions of increases in transportation funding.

Third, TxDOT is an agency in total chaos, has been run so inefficiently, and has so severely mismanaged taxpayer resources, nothing short of a total house cleaning is necessary to restore the public trust, and end the duplication of duties and other inefficiencies that waste taxpayer money. Next, lawmakers must commit to STOP all borrowing for roads, particularly loser toll projects. This includes borrowing money and building toll projects that can't pay for themselves. The interest on the borrowed money is unsustainable and buries the next generation in debt that will hamper our ability to meet future transportation needs. House Transportation Committee Chair Joe Pickett pointed out at an event in June that taxpayers are paying $21 billion in interest to borrow just the first $6 billion in state debt for roads (not counting local debt and other off-budget debt incurred).

Lastly, lawmakers MUST prioritize transportation. In 1980, transportation was 15% of the state budget, today it sits at less than 5%. Aside from the gas tax diversions, there are other transportation revenue sources like the vehicle sales tax that taxpayers already pay that go to fund general government rather than funding roads. The vehicle sales tax brings in $3 billion a year (on average). Compare that to a 10 cent gas tax hike that would reap less than $1 billion per year, and you start to see how simply prioritizing the taxes we already pay will go a long way to fixing our road woes WITHOUT having to raise taxes (either gas tax or toll taxes).

Politics, not shortage of cash, hampering road fix

With all this jockeying around in transportation circles, one thing is certain, politics, not leadership, rules the day, especially considering Perry's political appointee, Jay Kimbrough, was chosen to head the supposed "reform" of TxDOT.

Senator Williams has made some bold statements that both challenged TxDOT and Perry on occasion. In 2007, he carried the moratorium bill, HB 1892 and SB 792, that put a hold on the sale of Texas roads to private, mostly foreign, entities. He's called TxDOT liars and warned of too many toll roads and too much debt that could cause a transportation system deemed "too big to fail" and in need of massive bailouts down the road. In contrast, he also allowed the Governor to severely compromise the moratorium bill and add market valuation (which translates into charging the highest possible toll rates the "market will bear" and Robin Hood tolling), and he supported installing license plate cameras on ALL Texas highways (big daddy government) as a giveaway to the traffic camera industry as well as supporting certain pass through finance agreements that make local taxpayers incur debt for STATE highways. So like Carona, he's a mixed bag.

However, how he chooses to move forward and whether or not he'll advocate for sensible, affordable transportation and call for a prioritization of transportation funding within the existing budget (a plus is he sits on Senate Finance Committee, that writes and controls the state budget), remains to be seen.

On the federal level, there has been no appreciable change in policy from the Bush Administration to the Obama Administration in regards to tolling and selling our highways to private entities in sweetheart monopolies. While Bush wanted to sell our public roads to his cronies and create "Lexus lanes" for the wealthy that relegate those who can't afford tolls to second class citizens on congested free lanes, Obama wants to continue to raid gas taxes to fund mass transit and likes tolls as a way to tax people out of their cars and into transit.

No matter how you slice it, politics, not a lack of funding has kept our roads from getting fixed and expanded. One thing is certain, we cannot go another budget cycle without properly funding our state and federal highway system. Thankfully, we the PEOPLE can have great influence on "politics." So let's get to it and demand that in the next state legislative session and in the next federal highway bill, lawmakers prioritize transportation without raising taxes.

Turf battle: Houghton wants piece of local toll pie

Link to blog here.

Houghton: State should be 'equity' partner in toll roads it helps fund


 11:33 AM Thu, Jul 29, 2010
Michael Lindenberger/Reporter  

Update: Just spoke to Commissioner Ted Houghton, who insisted it's only fair to point out that even if "the state" gets a cut of local toll revenues, the money will be spent locally -- and in most cases according to decisions made by the regional planning agencies, such as the Regional Transportation Council.
Fair enough.

He also says he's less worried about the specifics of the deals between the state and the local toll authorities, than in the change in approach he says is long over due. "It's a philosophical difference. We need to let the (locals) understand that you can't just assume you come here and we'll hand you money and that's the last we ever see of it. It ought to be looked at as an investment. The taxpayers are paying, and in return they get an asset. But they ought to get more than the asset. These are revenue-producing assets, and they ought to produce a return (back to the taxpayers.)"

Of course, if by insisting on a revenue-split, you end up jacking the toll rates up, then the toll payers are the ones who are paying that return -- in a sense like asking some shareholders to pay extra for their shares, so that the dividends to everyone can be bigger. But he makes a valid point to say these questions ought to be debate. "We need more revenue sources. It's got to come from somewhere," he said, noting that neither the state nor federal government is likely to raise gas taxes anytime soon.

In a remarkable development a few minutes ago, the Texas Transportation Commission has signaled that it will expect to be treated as an equity partner in future public or private toll road projects for which the state provides right of way or other contributions.

In approving new toll projects in Travis County and in El Paso, Commissioner Ted Houghton of El Paso insisted that the word grant be replaced with the word "equity."

He said he would like Texas to get a share of revenues from every toll transaction, an arrangement he said would recognize the significant tax contributions -- $80 million in bond money in the El Paso example -- the state makes to these toll roads.

The money is slated to allow the Camino Real Regional Mobility Authority reconstruct two main lanes (without tolls) as part of its overall project to add the managed lanes that will toll drivers seeking a faster commute much like the paid HOV lanes on LBJ Freeway will do once that highway is rebuilt. (Houghton says, and I haven't been able to get anyone at the CRRMA to actually pick up the phone to confirm, that the $80 million wanted for this project would pay for all of its costs. He raises a valid question, at least to my mind, If the state is paying outright for a project that will be tolled, then why shouldn't the resulting toll revenues be shared with the state?)

Still, the idea of having to treat the money from the state as an investment, rather than a grant, brought immediate concern from CRRMA folks and its lawyer. If TxDOT expects a cut off the top of toll revenues, then traffic and revenue studies "on which we have spent millions" will have to be redone, they said.

That's not certain, given that it will depend on how firmly TxDOT digs in its heels in the negotiations over what "equity" will mean for the state.

But Houghton was clear that he thinks TxDOT should share in the revenues of toll roads it helps build. The impact will be certain: Either toll rates on the project must be raised or the amount of money investors or lenders are willing to provide for the project will be reduced.

Houghton said he believes most toll rates in Texas are already set below market rates -- the amount drivers really think the faster commuters are worth -- and so higher toll rates to make room for revenue sharing with TxDOT makes sense, he said.

This idea, championed in North Texas by the Regional Transportation Council, is why NTTA now regularly raises its toll rates. But El Paso tolling officials said their regional rates are closer to that market rates than in some wealthier areas of the state, and they said TxDOT's insistence on equity could spoil the deal they've negotiated.

The El Paso concerns may not materialize, however. The wording change pushed through by Houghton does not impose any particular terms on the project. It merely requires a negotiation and the next step will be for the El Paso officials to decide what the word "equity" will mean.

(The past is never a sure guide to the future, but if the North Texas experience is predictive, they'll be arguing about this for months. Just saying.)

But the vote, which was unanimous despite hesitation by some commissioners, is important for another reason, and could significantly change the terms of future toll road financing in North Texas.

Houghton said "I've been thinking about this for a very long time," and feels strongly that if the state provides right of way or other assistance for a toll road, it should be brought in as an investor -- with ownership rights in the toll revenues.

It's not unheard of here.

The state chipped in $160 million to make possible the eastern extension of the President George Bush Turnpike, a 10-mile, six-lane extension from SH 78 to Interstate 30 that will cost $1.04 billion and open late next year.

In return NTTA will charge tolls that are 20 percent higher than the rate for the rest of the system, and that money will be paid to the state, NTTA spokeswoman Sherita Coffelt said. By law will let RTC spend it on other projects in North Texas.

Still, it's all but certain to create another layer of complication for already tense deals with NTTA and TxDOT, and potentially local officials as well -- especially in an area where even the toll authority leaders are saying drivers are tolled too much.

Just before the meeting adjourned, Commissioner Ned Holmes of Houston suggested the commission needs to give the staff guidance about what it meant by "equity." He said insisting on a slice from the top of revenue would be onerous for some smaller toll authorities, and said instead they ought to have a share of net profits.

But what impact his feelings will have is far from clear. After he made his comments, his colleagues adjourned the meeting without discussion.

Stimulus waste: Tunnel to nowhere


Link to article here.

Tunnel to Nowhere Among Millions Wasted in Stimulus Spending, Senate GOP Report Says
Wednesday, August 04, 2010
  By Fred Lucas, Staff Writer
CNS News.com


Washington (CNSNews.com) – The federal government is spending $62 million on a tunnel to nowhere in Pittsburgh, Pa., $89,000 on a sidewalk that leads to a ditch in Boynton, Okla., and almost $200,000 to study voter perception of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, better known as the stimulus act, from which these other projects are funded.
 
That’s according to a report released on Tuesday by the offices of Republican Sens. John McCain of Arizona and Tom Coburn of Oklahoma. Both Coburn and McCain, the Republican presidential nominee in 2008, opposed the stimulus bill backed by President Barack Obama.
The $862-billion stimulus bill was signed into law by Obama in February 2009.
 
White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs scoffed at the Republicans' report. “This has much more to do with politics,” Gibbs said.
 
When asked if he believed it was a credible report, Gibbs said, “no.”
 
The 74-page report includes numerous projects, such as:

-- $554,763 for the National Forest Service to replace windows in a closed visitor center at Mount St. Helens;
 
-- $762,372 to create “Dance Draw” interactive dance software;
 
-- $1.9 million for international ant research;
 
-- $1.8 million for a road project that is threatening a pastor’s home;
 
-- $308 million for a joint clean energy venture with BP, a highly unpopular firm since the massive oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico;
 
-- $3.8 million for a “streetscaping” project that has reduced traffic and caused a business to fire two employees;
 
-- $16 million to help Boeing clean up an environmental mess it created in 2007;
 
-- $200,000 to help Siberian communities lobby Russian policymakers;
 
-- $39.7 million to upgrade the statehouse and political offices in Topeka, Kan.;
 
-- $760,000 to Georgia Tech to study improvised music;
 
-- $700,000 to study why monkeys respond negatively to inequity;
 
-- $363,760 to help NIH promote the positive impacts of stimulus projects;
 
-- $456,663 to study the circulation of Neptune’s atmosphere;
 
-- $529,648 to study the effects of local populations on the environment…in the Himalayas.
 
“Eighteen months since the passage of the stimulus bill, millions of jobs are still gone and the economy is as uncertain as ever,” Coburn and McCain wrote in the report. “The only thing getting a boost is our national debt. The stimulus has helped push it 23 percent higher, to $13.2 trillion, a new record.”
 
Gibbs pointed out that Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics who advised the McCain campaign, recently completed a report with Princeton economist Alan Binder on what would have happened to the economy in the absence of the stimulus act and the $700 billion bailout of the financial industry, also known as Troubled Assets Relief Program.
 
“I think the best person for Sen. McCain to debate on this is the chief economic advisor of his own presidential campaign, who not only weighed in on the president’s recovery plan but has in the last week written an analysis on what our economy would look like without the steps that we took. It’s a report that says instead of 8 million jobs lost, that figure would be 16 million jobs,” Gibbs said.
 
CBS News reporter Chip Reid – who covered the McCain campaign – argued that Zandi is a registered Democrat, was only an outside adviser to the McCain campaign and did not formulate the campaign’s economic policy, but Gibbs nevertheless was dismissive of the question.  
 
Gibbs insisted that the stimulus act is working, adding that Vice President Joe Biden is still overseeing the expenditures.
 
“Every day the vice president and the vice president’s staff work diligently to assure that projects that receive funding abide by certain standards, all available on the Internet, a level of transparency not seen in government programs, particularly those with the magnitude of this,” Gibbs said.

Trans Texas Corridor TTC-35 officially DEAD!

NOTE: While we celebrate this victory, there are three active Trans Texas Corridor routes currently moving forward: TTC-69, La Entrada de Pacifico, and Ports to Plains. Also, the Loop 9 project around DFW through parts of Rockwall County, is widely believed to be part of TTC-35. So we must stay vigilant, insist the Trans Texas Corridor be removed COMPLETELY from the transportation code, that all contracts to move forward with a TTC concept be revoked, and work with existing 391 commissions and form new ones in the path of ALL TTC-style corridors to STOP it DEAD in its tracks as this commission did!

To read the official Federal Highway Administration Record of Decision, go here.

TTC-35 officially declared DEAD by feds


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.

PPPs equal corporate welfare

Link to article here.

Privatization is corporate welfare for the wealthy

July 24, 2010
Daily Journal.com

What is wrong with privatization?

Our government entities are a public trust; they belong to everyone. Privatization is sneaking through the back door in the form of public-private partnerships. What does it mean? Privatization is a betrayal of the public trust. What is owned and operated by governments are public enterprises that belongs to us -- we the people.
Privatization is a form of government and private piracy of the state and national trust. In other words, the Garden State Arts Center and Byrne Arena were privatized because of the misconception that they cost the taxpayer money. Actually, they did. But they also returned money to offset taxes and government costs. And most of all, they belonged to us.

What is wrong with this?

When private companies take over a public project, the focus shifts away from the public interest and meeting community needs to ensure profits for the companies' shareholders. Quality goes down. Companies cut costs by paying workers less, not offering them benefits or permanent jobs, and reducing health and safety measures. High staff turnover means the quality of services goes down and risks to the community increase:


Higher costs. There are many examples of how privatization cost the public more since interest on loans to the private sector is higher than when the public sector borrows. Many efforts cost tens of millions of dollars before contracts are even signed, and deals are costly and difficult to get out of. Money that should have gone to meet community needs end up in the hands of lawyers, consultants and corporations.

Secrecy. The interest of commercial confidentiality overrides policies to protect the public's right to know about how the people's money is being spent. Commercial confidentiality means information on contracts and negotiations are often unavailable to the public.

Loss of accountability. Public control and accountability are both compromised because public standards are seen as obstacles to profiteering business ventures.
Even municipal officers have been kept in the dark about all information regarding the financing and operation of community enterprises, while the wealthy take a bath in the million and billions of dollars in corporate welfare.

So, we could wind up living in a corporatetocracy. Our democracy is waning fast. Let's not give it away.

Tino Rozzo
Vineland

WSJ: Towns replace good roads with cheap alternatives

Link to article here. Our government's lack of prioritizing road taxes, has led to roads that go back to the "stone age."

Roads to Ruin: Towns Rip Up the Pavement

Asphalt Is Replaced By Cheaper Gravel; 'Back to Stone Age'

By LAUREN ETTER
Wall Street Journal
July 17, 2010

SPIRITWOOD, N.D.—A hulking yellow machine inched along Old Highway 10 here recently in a summer scene that seemed as normal as the nearby corn swaying in the breeze. But instead of laying a blanket of steaming blacktop, the machine was grinding the asphalt road into bits.

"When [counties] had lots of money, they paved a lot of the roads and tried to make life easier for the people who lived out here," said Stutsman County Highway Superintendant Mike Zimmerman, sifting the dusty black rubble through his fingers. "Now, it's catching up to them."

Outside this speck of a town, pop. 78, a 10-mile stretch of road had deteriorated to the point that residents reported seeing ducks floating in potholes, Mr. Zimmerman said. As the road wore out, the cost of repaving became too great. Last year, the county spent $400,000 on an RM300 Caterpillar rotary mixer to grind the road up, making it look more like the old homesteader trail it once was.

Paved roads, historical emblems of American achievement, are being torn up across rural America and replaced with gravel or other rough surfaces as counties struggle with tight budgets and dwindling state and federal revenue. State money for local roads was cut in many places amid budget shortfalls.


In Michigan, at least 38 of the 83 counties have converted some asphalt roads to gravel in recent years. Last year, South Dakota turned at least 100 miles of asphalt road surfaces to gravel. Counties in Alabama and Pennsylvania have begun downgrading asphalt roads to cheaper chip-and-seal road, also known as "poor man's pavement." Some counties in Ohio are simply letting roads erode to gravel.

The moves have angered some residents because of the choking dust and windshield-cracking stones that gravel roads can kick up, not to mention the jarring "washboard" effect of driving on rutted gravel.

But higher taxes for road maintenance are equally unpopular. In June, Stutsman County residents rejected a measure that would have generated more money for roads by increasing property and sales taxes.

"I'd rather my kids drive on a gravel road than stick them with a big tax bill," said Bob Baumann, as he sipped a bottle of Coors Light at the Sportsman's Bar Café and Gas in Spiritwood.

Rebuilding an asphalt road today is particularly expensive because the price of asphalt cement, a petroleum-based material mixed with rocks to make asphalt, has more than doubled over the past 10 years. Gravel becomes a cheaper option once an asphalt road has been neglected for so long that major rehabilitation is necessary.

"A lot of these roads have just deteriorated to the point that they have no other choice than to turn them back to gravel," says Larry Galehouse, director of the National Center for Pavement Preservation at Michigan State University. Still, "we're leaving an awful legacy for future generations."

Some experts caution that gravel roads can be costlier in the long run than consistently maintained asphalt because gravel needs to be graded and smoothed. A gravel road "is not a free road," says Purdue University's John Habermann, who organized a recent seminar about the resurgence of gravel roads titled "Back to the Stone Age."

Paving grew in popularity in the early 20th century as more cars hit streets and spread when the federal government built the Interstate Highway System.

Over the years, many of the two-lane arteries that connect country roads with metro areas have deteriorated under rising traffic and the growing weight of farm combines, logging trucks and other heavy equipment.

Frederick Wachtel, county engineer in Coshocton County, Ohio, says his budget, largely driven by fuel taxes and vehicle registration fees, was off 5% last year, the first decline in nearly 20 years. He is now letting some of his roads return to nature.

In Spiritwood one day recently, a soft breeze carried the scents of cow manure and hot asphalt over the tall broom grass. The giant Caterpillar chugged along at a speed of 2.4 feet per minute and pulverized Old Highway 10 into a black dust with chunks of rock and pavement. A piece of equipment following behind rolled the surface flat.

The machines rumbled along a path carved by homesteaders' covered wagons in the 1800s. Over time, grain elevators and railroad depots sprung up along the route, which became known as the Old Red Trail. Later, the road was paved and renamed Highway 10.

After Interstate 94 was built alongside the road in the 1950s, it became Old Highway 10. Traffic volumes gradually dropped until Old 10 became a lazy backcountry road dotted with abandoned farmsteads. In the 1960s the state gave Old 10 to the counties it ran through, leaving them to pay for upkeep. North Dakota's Stutsman County got a 30-mile stretch.

The gift became a burden. The Stutsman highway department, which gets the bulk of its funds from local property taxes, state fuel taxes and vehicle registration fees, let the road fall into disrepair as it juggled other projects. Every year without major maintenance, the road became more expensive to fix.

Judy Graves of Ypsilanti, N.D., voted against the measure to raise taxes for roads. But she says she and others nonetheless wrote to Gov. John Hoeven and asked him to stop Old 10 from being ground up because it still carries traffic to a Cargill Inc. malting plant. She says the county has mismanaged its finances and badly neglected roads.

"Our expenses outweigh the income," says Mr. Zimmerman, who has been with the county highway department for nearly 30 years. He says the county will pay about $2,600 per mile annually for the newly ground-up road, as against about $75,000 per mile to reconstruct it.

Gayne Gasal, who lives along the redone stretch of road, says it has turned out "better than we all thought." But Sportsman's Bar owner Hilda Kuntz worries that the classic cars and bikers that roll through town in the summer will stay away.

"It's going to kill my business," she said.

Editorial: Don't count on tolls

Link to article here.

Don't count on highway tolls

The Post & Courier
Monday, July 26, 2010

Toll roads are periodically suggested as a way to help fund South Carolina's major road needs. Greenville's Southern Connector, however, is an example of their risks.

After years of struggling to meet its bond payments, the privately financed toll road filed for bankruptcy this month. A court is expected to determine its future later this summer.

The road was conceived as a conduit for industrial development in southern Greenville County. But that development didn't occur at the anticipated rate. Consequently, traffic was insufficient to provide the needed level of toll revenue to pay for its construction.

Private investors aren't the only losers in this project. The highway is part of the state system, and has been maintained by the Department of Transportation. While the tolls were supposed to generate sufficient revenue to pay for that work, the state ended up covering the expense.

South Carolina's experience with toll roads is limited and mixed. The state operates a single toll road, the Hilton Head Connector. Traffic on the resort island expressway has been more than sufficient to sustain the expense of the road. Unlike the Southern Connector, that road is solely the state's responsibility.

One of DOT's priority projects is the construction of I-73 from the North Carolina state line to Myrtle Beach. The agency has been authorized by the Federal Highway Administration to toll the project to help pay its $2.5 billion cost. A public-private partnership is a possibility, if the state DOT board approves the toll option. Toll proposals for the interstate should be closely scrutinized in view of the Southern Connector's failure.

Meanwhile, the Legislature should look to other sources of revenue for state highways as the economy improves. At 16 cents, South Carolina's gas tax is the lowest in the Southeast, and one of the lowest in the nation. Despite the clear need for more road money, the tax hasn't been increased in more than 20 years.

Like tolls, the gas tax is a user fee. The disadvantage of tolls is evident in the Southern Connector's failure. The connector is evidence that tolls can't be counted on as a simple, painless solution for funding new highway projects.


Copyright © 1995 - 2010 Evening Post Publishing Co..

Letter to Editor: Why are Ontario taxpayers paying for private toll road extension?

Link to article here.

Why are Ontario taxpayers paying for this private toll road extension?

Kawartha Lakes This Week
July 16, 2010
 

To the editor:

re: 'Complete Hwy. 407 extension by 2013,' letter to Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty and MPP Jeff Leal by Stu Harrison, general manager of the Greater Peterborough and District Chamber of Commerce

We here in the Niagara Region would like to know why are Ontario taxpayers paying twice for this private road extension? There are numerous vehicles traveling every day from the Niagara Region, Hamilton, Burlington and Oakville to the Peterborough and Kawarthas area. Naturally, we would like to see this road completed to Highway 35/115. However, presently we are the ones that have to pay the ridiculous excessive tolls of approximately $50 for a return trip on this private road just to get around Toronto. It is one of the highest toll charges in North America.

Has the Chamber researched how many vehicles travel the other way from the Peterborough area to the Hamilton and Niagara Region using the present private Hwy. 407 toll road?

The toll road funds are presently going to a foreign consortium after our provincial government underhandedly sold our new provincial Hwy. 407 without the taxpayer's mandated permission. A lot of taxpayers who have to use this highway to get around Toronto are still upset about this matter.

The provincial taxpayers paid for this original Hwy. 407 and now it looks like we are going to pay for the private Hwy. 407 road extension while a foreign company reaps the profits. And to top it all, the users will have to pay additional tolls on this extension. Will it cost $100 for a return trip on the new extension? Has the Chamber of Commerce costed this out? Will commercial vehicles, cottagers and tourists want to pay these additional excessive toll fees?

Isn't it time that Hwy. 407 be returned back to the residents of Ontario and the province reduce the toll fees to a reasonable amount. This is where the federal funds should be applied. If the private consortiums want to extend this private highway they need to finance the cost of purchasing the land and building the highway with their own funds.

Phil Baranoski

St. Catharines

Subcategories

Eminent Domain

Video

Page 65 of 103

Latest News

Latest Press Releases