BIKE: A short lesson in Texas road politics

[Roger Baker]

[Just in case you wonder why nothing that makes much long-range sense 
comes out of the TxDOT bureaucracy, here is some of my independent 
commentary that can help fill in the details of how transpo policy 
really gets made in this state. In my opinion, Rick Perry's Corridor 
plan will collapse as part of a massive toll road revenue bond default 
as gasoline prices continue to soar due to an approaching world oil 
production peak. Then TxDOT will pretend to be astonished that such a 
thing could ever happen, the road lobby will be rich and the money will 
be long gone -- invested in the hip pocket national bank. -- Roger]


The following stuff may not get reported widely.

I was at the Texas House Transportation Committee meeting in the
capitol yesterday (Feb. 8) and all the biggies from TxDOT were there; 
Phillip
Russell from the TTA which is really managing Perry's whole toll road
thing and closely confering with him, CTRMA lawyer Brian Cassedy. Then
there were Williamson County Tx. Rep. Mike Krusee leading the show, and
the usual room full of special interests dressed in suits.

Robert Nichols of the now-5-person Texas Transportation Commission
spoke. [I personally like Nichols. What I like is that he seems by
nature to be smart thoughtful fair and honest when operating within his
required role, and very well informed on the details of TxDOT affairs
and policy].

Nichols is a successful businessman from the Beaumont area who seems to
have been selected by Perry to be a top manager of the $6 billion TxDOT
bureaucracy. Him and Ric Williamson seem to me to do most of the policy
setting there, probably following de facto policy agreed on by Perry
and the various road and real estate lobbies, with support of many
local politicians.

The bad part is the policy that Nichols promotes. He has helped
organize a huge expansion in TxDOT road building contracts amounting to
about $3 billion in the next four of five years using the Texas
Mobility Fund, to be followed by fifteen years of lesser activity -- as
he described it to the committee.

He actually wants to buy out the central metropolitan railroad yards in
Dallas and Houston (now they have become nearly pure freight rather
than passengers). Freight is now backing up from rail onto trucks in
urban Texas -- because the rail lines are often at capacity. This is
because of their antiquated but conservative policies and massive fixed
infrastructure and land investments. Rail yards can become de facto
warehouses, and there are probably railroad profits to be made from
that.

Meanwhile, something like 85% of all the Chinese goods going east from
Long Beach and LA come through Dallas by rail. Dallas doesn't have much
going for it except as a long established trade route and banking and
commercial center based on two railroads that once crossed there.
Apparently a whole bunch of Dallas money got invested in their existing
rail hub and using IH 35 as a NAFTA Highway. Deals were made; huge
warehouse and probably real estate investments were made based on the
IH 35 NAFTA trade corridor concept.

But now Nichols/TxDOT want to relocate rail yards from their central
urban locations and move them outside to some less troublesome
location. And what does TxDOT want to do with the old rail yards? To
build new highways along and among the old rail lines!

How does Nichols/TxDOT propose to get the money? LIke much that TxDOT
is trying to do lately,  it is based on using a reliable revenue stream
trickle to borrow much more from Wall Street.

If you diverted all car and road-related fees away from the Texas
general revenue fund and into TxDOT, it would total about $200 million
a years, about $10 per person, and then they could use this cash stream
to borrow a billion or two and use it to relocate the urban rail yards
they figure. TxDOT also want the Texas Leg to remove the cap on its
yearly rail spending.

But Krusee complained that others in the state keep complaining to him
that Texas would have to make up the lost revenues somehow. Some young
legislator on the Committee asked Nichols if all this was really a cure
for only having a third of the road money we decide we really need.
Nichols responded by saying at least it would get us closer to TxDOT's
goal.

The Mayor of Dallas (and ex-newspaper reporter), Laura Miller, spoke
strongly against moving any new road more than 3-5 miles from the
current IH 35 alignment, and thought the rail yards were entirely
satisfactory where they are now inside Dallas. Along similar lines the
mayor of Hillsboro and several folks from Laredo testified, as well as
others from Dallas. The Hillsboro Mayor spoke in favor of commuter rail
and light rail.

What seems to be going on just under the surface is that those who
invested in the NAFTA corridor are poised to so their long promised
corridor bypassed by whatever is deemed most profitable to the Spanish
concern CINTRA. Apparently, CINTRA would get the right to control
development along its corridor.

By its nature any for-profit highway that bypasses a free public
highway becomes its economic competitor, and there is plenty of cash to
be made from deals regarding access and development rights, depending
on the fine print in the toll road contract that TxDOT finally signs
in exchange for $5 billion worth of CINTRA's bypass toll road.

Rep. Mike Krusee ended up with a curious kind of a philosophical review
of the situation. "Building a new interstate is about the highest
economic incentive that you can create".

Krusee went on to describe a "paradigm shift" at TxDOT in the last 4-5
years from a "paving company" to an "economic development company".
Perry, he said, wants to relieve the economic harm of congestion.

-- Roger Baker