TxDOT/City RUSHED tricky contracts postponed!

Due to public pressure, the city council postponed the TxDOT freeway toll right of way contracts near the tail end of the 1:30 in the morning council meeting. The items were withdrawn without a new date set. We expect them to pop back up within weeks.

THE CONTRACTS AND THE BACKGROUND: When CAMPO approved Austin-area toll conversions, it did so given the existing understanding about how toll roads would be financed. Just days ago, the state legislature passed a bill that shifts 50% of the utility relocation burden of toll conversions from TxDOT to Austin.

TxDOT wants to "advance" the cost of this new obligation ($51 Million) to Austin but its a phony rebate to create a "feel good" windfall.  TxDOT, the Austin City Council, and the American Statesman (in their headline) want you to think this as a "windfall" for the city.

TxDOT and the state are simply giving with one hand and taking with the other. They are attempting to create an illusion that supporting these three toll conversions (US 183, SH 71, and 290 West) is benefiting Austin financially. It's not.

Are relocating utilities a big deal anyway? These are existing roadways, right? How expensive could it be to relocate utilities when the corridor for the road already exists and is simply being toll converted? Well, it is a big deal.

The footprint of a toll conversion project is necessarily larger than what's needed for a free road because you have to fit in toll lanes and maintain the preexisting free lanes too and keep them separate.  Our existing roads have right-of-way corridors for expansion were not planned for the larger footprint required by toll conversion. The larger footprint means extra right-of-way must be acquired and utilities most be relocated.  This can be surprisingly expensive. In fact, it's a good deal more expensive than actually building the road in fact in the cast of SH 71.

IMPORTANT: For a typical roadway project, 90% or more of the project goes where you think it would go: building the road . But if you examine the TxDOT toll conversion analysis for SH 71, you see only 35% of the cost of the project is for roadway construction. Over half the cost of the $168 million project goes to buying new right-of-way (20%) and having to relocate utilities (35%).

This is what makes TxDOT's offer to rebate the city's fresh-from-the-legislature newly created utility relocation obligation so infelicitous. The cost the city of Austin is supposedly being rebated is a creation of the roadway's toll conversion.

We can argue about whether Austin pays 50% of the utility relocation costs for toll conversions or not, but the fact of the matter is that toll conversion takes an existing roadway and through its larger footprint and tolled operation makes for a more expensive road to build, operate, and maintain than a free road does.  TxDOT and the state don't ultimately pay for the utility relocation or right-of-way expenses when toll conversions occur.  We all must understand that WE ultimately pay for the added expense of these toll conversions.

OTHER IMPORTANT NOTES:


BETTY DUNKERLY WILL REPLACE SLUSHER ON CAMPO.
Betty Dunkerly stated yesterday, "...this means our community will save half of the cost of utility relocations through this "insurance" policy."

Betty's "insurance" argument is an excuse. We've had plenty of excuses, but only a few champions that will fight for the people on this issue over the past year.


Betty Dunkerly had the toll authority's vice chair, Lowell Lebermann, act as a "bundler" in her last campaign. Bundlers collect money from a number of people for the candidates.

These contracts were slipped in last minute, by design, with no public debate. The Governor signed House Bill 2702 with it going into effect the day he signed it, as opposed to September when most bills go into effect, again by design. And the City manager signed these contracts days ago and Council and the public found out about it Tuesday. All by design, in rush to bypass the public process.

These contracts get us a few step closer to tolling our freeways. If the council accepts the 50 million unexpected "slush fund", there is a more likely chance they will go to CAMPO to vote and not want to give it up. They will have an INCENTIVE to vote for the toll plan again. It's a bribe. If they vote for it, that means they already have plans to spend it on their pet projects. They get the one time 50 million and Central Texas families get closer to paying hundreds of millions a year for freeway tolls. It's bad government. And, it can cripple our economy. And, Betty has already said she is for the $51 million contracts. She stands for her toll authority friends and a pile of slush fund cash, while we stand without representation.

QUESTIONS:
Why did Perry's signature on HB 2702 go into effect last week instead of in September, as most non-emergency legislation?
Why hasn't the city given myself and others the contracts to look over yet?