EMINENT DOMAIN

ANARCHY vs. COMMON SENSE

By: Trey Duhon and Don Garrett
Citizens for a Better Waller County
Copyright 2009

One of our founding fathers and the second president of the United States, John Adams, once stated, “Property must be secured or liberty can not exist.” Adams understood perfectly well that property rights were the heart of the necessary liberties that would form the basis of our democracy. As Adams also stated, “"The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.” Private property rights were the cornerstone of the liberties which were essential to the success of our new society. For this reason, the founding fathers created the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which provides that “private property [shall not] be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

So you can imagine the surprise and shock of property owners across the country when the U.S. Supreme Court in 2005 dropped a bombshell on private property rights in America. In a 5-4 split decision in Kelo v. the City of New London (now known as the Kelo case), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a governmental entity can give the power of eminent domain to private entities for those entities to use in the name of “economic development”.

The case originated in 1998 when pharmaceutical company Pfizer built a facility next to Fort Trumbull and the City of New London determined that someone else could make better use of the land than the Fort Trumbull residents. The city handed over its power of eminent domain (which is the ability to take private property for public use) to the New London Development Corporation, a private entity, to condemn the entire neighborhood for private development. As the Fort Trumbull property owners discovered, when a private entity can wield government’s power of eminent domain and can justify taking property under the guise of “economic development,” all private property owners are in trouble.

Justice O’Connor wrote the dissent, which was joined by Chief Justice Rehnquist, Justice Scalia, and Justice Thomas. Justice O’Connor found that the majority had confused “public use” with “public purpose” as that term is used in the Fifth Amendment. In interpreting the Fifth Amendment, O’Connor wrote, “we have read the Fifth Amendment to impose two distinct conditions on the exercise of eminent domain: “the taking must be for a ‘public use’ and ‘just compensation’ must be paid to the owner. These two limitations serve to protect “the security of Property,” which Alexander Hamilton described to the Philadelphia Convention as one of the “great objects of Government.” Although the public may “use” the property after it is transferred and developed, that “use” is not a “public use” such as a road, a hospital, or a military base.

O’Connor recognized that the courts are ill-equipped to pass judgment on whether or not the public will be better off after the transfer of property. She succinctly summed it up by stating, “The specter of condemnation hangs over all property. Nothing is to prevent the State fromreplacing any Motel 6 with a Ritz-Carlton, any home with a shopping mall, or any farm with a factory.”

Sadly, Justice O’Connor was correct.

After Kelo, the neighborhood was condemned, the houses were bulldozed, and the developer subsequently failed to obtain financing, and today the land sits barren, a blight on the community and a substantial blow to the tax base of the city.

How can anyone say that the current state of the barren land is a “public use” or even a benefit to the public for that matter? So, how do we protect private property rights in Texas in a post-Kelo world? Especially with the Obama administration promising billions of dollars in infrastructure funds to states and local governments, all private property owners have cause to be concerned about whether they will be protected.

Since Kelo, 42 states have enacted legislation to restrict the use of eminent domain for economic development. The Texas legislature quickly responded by passing Senate Bill 7.

SB 7 prohibited the use of eminent domain for economic development, but left huge loopholes for things such as the Trans Texas Corridor, sports stadiums, or instances in which a city sought to “eliminate an existing harm on society from slum or blighted areas.” In addition, without a constitutional amendment to the Texas constitution, there is no guarantee that SB 7 will withstand a court test. Lastly, SB 7 did nothing to correct past problems with Texas eminent domain law.

What kind of problems were there with Texas eminent domain law?

Believe it or not, the attack on private property rights in Texas actually began long before the Kelo case. In 2004, the Texas Supreme Court’s decision in Hubenak vs. San Jacinto Gas Transmission Company further eroded property rights by making eminent domain easier for governments. Although previous law had required government to make a “good faith offer” in the initial stage of a condemnation, Hubenak changed that.

State law, according to the Hubenak ruling, authorizes the initiation of condemnation proceedings only if the two parties are "unable to agree" on a purchase price, and the Court found that any offer at all by a political subdivision satisfied the law's intent. Therefore, the government could make an offer on property for an absurdly low amount, and then initiate court proceedings once the owner rejected that offer. By removing the requirement for good faith negotiations with its Hubenak decision, the Texas Supreme Court tipped the balance further away from property owners to the benefit of the state. This ruling forces property owners to fight condemnation in court where the property owner is at a severe disadvantage, due to the fact that even if the property owner is successful in court, he is unable to recover attorney fees or expert witness fees (appraiser fees). Such a disadvantage forces most landowners to settle in order to avoid the high cost of litigation, which only serves to erode the damages a property owner will eventually receive.

HB 2006 sought to address the Hubenak case and the Kelo aftermath by 1) defining “public use”, 2) removing the legal presumption that any condemnation by a government entity is for “public use” by requiring proof of public use by the condemnor, 3) changing court rules so that a “bona fide offer” must be made initially, 4) allowing successful property owners to recover reasonable attorney fees in litigation, and 5) allowing landowners to recover compensation for “diminished access” that may result from a partial condemnation to a property.

As the Texas Public Policy Foundation determined, “HB 2006 is essential to reversing [the substantial erosion of private property in the last 50 years] and restoring the property rights of all Texans.” The Texas legislature agreed, passing HB 2006 by overwhelming margins in 2007.

Unfortunately, there was one person who disagreed – Governor Rick Perry, who vetoed HB 2006 without giving the Legislature an opportunity to override the veto. Perry made unsubstantiated claims that the diminished access provisions would substantially raise the cost of condemnation for local governmental entities. The Texas Public Policy Foundation correctly concluded, however, that the cost of paying these damages would have been less than what Perry alleged, and such cost was pale in comparison to the cost to property owners in having HB 2006 fail to become law.

Where do we go from here?

First, it is essential that the Texas legislature immediately pass a bill similar to HB 2006, providing the protections already referenced above, including 1)restoring the definition of “public use” to its traditional meaning, 2) eliminating the blight/slum loophole from SB 7, 3) place the burden of proof on the condemning entity to prove “public use and necessity”, and 4) That if a condemning entity does not use condemned property for the purpose for which it was initially condemned within five years of the date it was taken, then the property should be offered back to the original property owner at the price for which it was taken.

In the event of a gubernatorial veto, the Texas legislature must be prepared to immediately override it. It is also vital that the Legislature and Texans pass a constitutional amendment making it clear that property shall not be condemned for economic development, so that SB 7 and HB 2006 can withstand any constitutional challenge in court.

What is interesting is that Gov. Perry, who will be running for re-election next year and will likely face a strong challenge from Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson, has suddenly come to the realization that a constitutional amendment is needed as soon as possible to “protect private property rights” of Texans, as he announced with much fanfare on January 22, 2009, that he would be working for a constitutional amendment to protect Texans from the Kelo decision, something he clearly did not do in the 2007 legislative session.

Eminent domain is an ugly word to any property owner. Unfortunately, it is a necessary tool for the public good if it is for a true public purpose, and subject to public control. Nobody can deny that our state is experiencing unparalleled growth, as it is estimated that Texas’ population by the year 2030 will increase by 10 million citizens and the demand on our infrastructure will increase proportionally along with the need for goods and services. Transportation will be a key component to accommodating this growth.

Perhaps the inherent problem in eminent domain is the failure to recognize that for many property owners, receiving fair market value is not truly adequate compensation for their land. Awarding fair market value obviously ignores intangibles such as sentimental value, historical family significance, and the simple fact that some property owners don’t want to sell their property, regardless of the price, for various reasons. Therefore it is time that government re-examine its position on eminent domain and instead of offering incentives to private developers and public private partnerships, perhaps the government should offer them to the property owner at both the state and federal level.

Additional incentives could be given to the property owner in the form of tax abatements, credits, deferment, and in special cases mitigation in the event there is the use of eminent domain and condemnations proceedings. The notion of providing additional benefits to citizens that have made sacrifices for the betterment of our state or country is not a new one. For example, one of the many ways we recognize the sacrifice made by our military veterans is by providing benefits such as home loans at reasonable rates through the Veterans’ Administration.

Why not recognize the sacrifice of private property owners that have no choice in giving up their land for the greater good? Something must be done to recognize the intrinsic fact that fair market value is not always adequate compensation. There are several opportunities for providing this recognition. Property owners having their property taken under the law of eminent domain for local, state, and or federal use should be exempt from federal capital gains and state income tax on the proceeds from the actual land and/or improved property taken. Since the property owners did not ask that their property be taken, is it fair that they be further penalized by having to reduce their net proceeds on their unwanted gain by capital gains, state income tax, or franchise tax obligations?

Should there be an agriculture exemption on the property at the time of taking then the remaining contiguous tracts or remaining parcels shall not be subject to roll back taxes in the event it is sold to a third party or the current owners wished to change the status of the exemption to something that is more suitable to the adjoining condemnation, such as new roads, parks, and other instances where it would be conducive to change the use of the land.

Therefore the property owner should be allowed to position himself without future penalty. In the event the remaining acreage is less than sufficient to qualify for an agriculture exemption by not meeting the gross acreage requirements, the parcel shall remain exempt. The status should remain until the property is conveyed to a third party that is not immediately legally related (by blood and or partnership structure) to the property owner and/or its use status changes. A transfer or sale to an immediate family member such as a wife, a sibling, spouse, child and/or grandchild should not change the status of the exemption.

Additionally, on rural and residential property the owner could be given a lifetime exemption on the remaining tract where the property value is frozen for the duration of their ownership similar to an age exemption after age 65, as long as the property is used as a primary residence. The property and/or parcel shall be defined by its dimension in a recorded lot, plat, or a legally described tract by the local appraisal district.

In the event that the taking subjects the property to negative conditions, the owner should be compensated not only for fair market value of the land taken, but also receive additional compensation on the remaining property for economic obsolescence. Excessive noises, pollution, congestion, and restricted access due to traffic patterns are examples that contribute to economic obsolescence. Economic or external obsolescence is defined by the American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers as “an element of accrued depreciation; a defect, usually incurable, cause by negative influences outside a site”. The difference in value is the loss attributed to this type of obsolescence.

Not all roads, easements, and other uses through eminent domain have a positive affect on real estate. A small business and/or rural farm where the actual taking totally consumes or destroys the owner’s ability to function should be offered the choice of mitigation or the elimination of acapital gains tax on their proceeds.

In the near future we will see more attempts to legitimize public private partnerships as an alternative method of financing public infrastructure projects. In the event a public private partnership is properly underwritten, property owners should be allowed to participate if they so choose. Unlike the Kelo situation where they were simply removed off of their property and compensated unwillingly, they should be offered the opportunity to participate in the economic profits of the project. The fair market value of their land could be treated as capital or equity contributed to the equity pool with guarantees that it be treated as the primary investor in the transaction (first in, first out).

Historically, the fight over property rights has always been a grass roots struggle, going back to when our forefathers chose to breakaway from King George. This struggle must continue today with the same vigor and passion lest we find ourselves with a Constitution being pushed into an abyss of irrelevance by self-serving interests and an indifferent government. We have a choice to make to restore parity in our legal system in regard to our diminishing property rights or sit idle and watch them become meaningless. Fair compensation and the legal process go hand in hand in restoring these rights to our property owners. As property rights deteriorate, so does the basis of our democracy and our American way of life. We must now decide if we will allow anarchy and tyranny to commence.

About the authors

Carbett “Trey” J. Duhon III
Trey Duhon is an attorney with a private practice in Waller, Texas, licensed since 1995. He currently serves as the president of the Waller Area Chamber of Commerce, in addition to serving as a director of the Waller County Toll Road Authority and as a director and vice president of Citizens for a Better Waller County. He was recently appointed to the Transportation Commission's citizen's Advisory Committee on the TTC-69. Trey graduated from Texas A&M University cum laude in 1992 and the University of Houston Law Center in 1995. He currently lives in the Fieldstore area just south of the Waller/Grimes County line with his wife, Jennifer.

Don M. Garrett
Don Garrett is a real estate broker, private investor, and consultant in Waller County, Texas. He has been a real estate professional for over 30 years and is a licensed real estate broker in Texas, Nebraska, North Carolina, and Georgia. During the ‘80’s he was responsible for liquidating a major bank portfolio in Houston, TX during the Savings & Loan Crisis. He is a board member and trustee of the Waller County Economic Development Partnership, president of Citizens for a Better Waller County, and was recently appointed as a director for the Waller County Sub-Regional Planning Commission. Don received his BS from Lamar University in 1970 and his M. Ed. from the University of Arizona in 1973. He and his wife Brenda live on their working farm near Hockley, TX.

© 2008 Citizens for a Better Waller County, P. O. Box 1802 Waller, TX. 77484: www.wallercountycitizens.org

Dan Byfield on "391" Commissions, TTC

Susan Rigdway Garry
Anti-Corridor/Rail Expansion (ACRE)

At its March 30 meeting, the Coupland Civic Organization heard a presentation from Dan Byfield, president of the American Land Foundation, a national property rights organization. Along with his wife Margaret, who founded another property rights group Stewards of the Range, Byfield was instrumental in forming the “391 Commissions” in Texas to fight the Trans-Texas Corridor.

The first “391” was founded in 2007 in Bell County—the East Central Texas Sub-Regional Planning Commission (ECTSRPC). One of its members is the City of Holland, and also speaking at the meeting were Mae Smith, mayor of Holland and president of the ECTSRPC, and Ralph Snyder, a Holland businessman and a director of the ECTSRPC. Snyder and his wife Marcia helped found the ECTSRPC.

Coordination

Byfield recounted that two-and-a-half years ago, he discovered a requirement in a Texas statute that TxDOT and other state agencies must “coordinate” their planning with local planning commissions. The requirement is in Chapter 391 of the Texas Local Government Code, hence, the name “391 Commissions.” He said, “I told Ralph we needed to start a commission. Ralph started meeting with officials in his area [eastern Bell County], formed the commission, and state agencies started coordinating with this commission.”

There must be two incorporated cities, two counties, or one city and one county to start a “391,” and then other entities such as school districts can join. The ECTSRPC began with Holland, Bartlett, Little River-Academy, and Rogers and then added their school districts.

TxDOT at bay--environmental process

Byfield said, “For two years now we have held TxDOT at bay. There’s no Corridor through our jurisdiction. We put a 30-mile-hole through the Corridor; they’re not going to build a road with a 30-mile gap.” The ECTRPC and Buckholts residents became concerned that TxDOT might bypass Bell County by going farther east through Buckholts, so Buckholts joined the ECTRPC, thus gaining its protection.

The ECTSRPC has stopped the Corridor through the environmental process. TxDOT cannot proceed until the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for Tier 1 is out. Snyder said, “There were 26 items that TxDOT was obligated to do that they didn’t do. We asked for a supplement to cover these items.”

The ECTSRPC made a formal demand that TxDOT stop the development of the Corridor and restudy it in a supplemental environmental study. The FEIS is still at the Federal Highway Administration, and Snyder says, “If they don’t approve it in the next couple of months, they have to start over.”

Mayor Smith and Ralph Snyder on Texas T-bone high-speed rail

Mayor Smith asked, “Why destroy the Blackland that you cannot replace? Stand up for your land! A statute is on the books that they have to listen to us. When we call, they come to Holland, Texas. We are 45 percent of Bell County.”

She also is concerned about the latest high-speed rail proposal, which is called the Texas T-Bone. A line will run through the state north to south, with a line coming toward it from Bryan that “T’s” into the north-south line in the Temple area. This line would damage the rural areas of Bell County represented by the ECTSRPC.

About high-speed rail, Snyder asked, “Who gets to pay for the planning, for the studies, for the state’s loan to foreign companies, for the decreased value of land on each side of it? We do!”

The ECTSRPC asked for our support in their fight against high-speed rail. They appreciated that the Coupland area had fought the previous high-speed rail proposal, and also that we were among the early opponents of the Corridor.

Legislative attempts to abolish "391's"

About possible attempts in the Legislature to abolish the “391’s,” Byfield said, “There is coordination language in federal statute as well. The National Environmental Policy Act has coordination in it.” Also, he believes the state “can’t do away with the statute because the COG’s [Councils of Government] were created under it.”

To form a Sub-Regional Planning Commission, the cities and counties must be in the same Council of Government. Williamson is not in the COG with Bell County; it is in the Capital Area COG, along with the counties of Bastrop, Blanco, Burnet, Caldwell, Fayette, Hays, Lee, Llano, and Travis.

Eminent domain

Regarding eminent domain in this legislative session, Byfield said there are eight bills and three constitutional amendments filed. He said there are some “good bills, supported by the Texas Farm Bureau, but they aren’t supported by the governor. We don’t know that we will see good legislation. This session is very important for rural Texas.”

Supporting "391's"

The speakers were asked, since Coupland is not incorporated, how we can participate in the Sub-Regional Planning Commission process. Snyder mentioned supporting the American Land Foundation and Stewards of the Range: “These two foundations operate on donations.” Mayor Smith added, “Support the commissions that are out there.” Currently, there are nine in Texas. News and descriptions of all of them are at www.391texas.blogspot.com

Attendees were given copies of Standing Ground, the publication of Stewards of the Range and American Land Foundation. You can view it online at www.stewards.us. The site of American Land Foundation is www.amland.us

© 2009 ACRE: acretexas.blogspot.com

Coupland Civic Organization to host local speaker

3/29/09

Taylor Daily Press

Dan Byfield, president of the American Land Foundation, a national property rights organization, will speak to the Coupland Civic Organization Monday in the Fellowship Hall of St. Peter’s Church of Coupland. The Coupland Civic Organization will host a spaghetti supper at 6:30 p.m. and the program will begin at 7 p.m.

Byfield will discuss the “391 Commissions” that he has formed in Texas to fight projects like the Trans-Texas Corridor. In addition to discussing helping local communities fight for their property rights, Byfield will also speak on related legislative issues, such as eminent domain.

Byfield has worked on property rights, water and natural resource issues as a legislative staff member. He has lobbied on behalf of agriculture for the Texas Farm Bureau. He did legislative work on property rights matters in New Mexico, Texas, and Washington for the Farm Credit Bank of Texas. In 1993, he formed the American Land Foundation. The American Land Foundation assists landowners and other property rights organizations nationwide.

© 2009 Taylor Daily Press: www.taylordailypress.net

Bills filed in the Texas Legislature would impact Sub-Regional Planning Commissions

H.B. No. 3552

By: Bonnen

A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

AN ACT relating to the composition of certain regional planning commissions.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
SECTION 1. Section 391.003, Local Government Code, is amended by amending Subsection (a) and adding Subsection (a-1) to read as follows:

(a) Except as provided by Subsection (a-1), any [Any] combination of counties or municipalities or of counties and municipalities may agree, by ordinance, resolution, rule, order, or
other means, to establish a commission.
(a-1) A county with a population of 240,000 or more that borders the Gulf of Mexico may agree to establish a commission as provided by Subsection (a) only with:
(1) counties with a population of less than 3.3 million that are located within 100 miles of the Gulf of Mexico;
(2) municipalities located wholly within a county described by Subdivision (1); or
(3) counties and municipalities described by Subdivisions (1) and (2).

SECTION 2. Not later than November 1, 2009, any county described by Section 391.003(a-1), Local Government Code, as added by this Act, participating in a regional planning commission that does not comply with Section 391.003(a-1), Local Government Code, as added by this Act, shall withdraw from the commission.

SECTION 3. This Act takes effect immediately if it receives a vote of two-thirds of all the members elected to each house, as provided by Section 39, Article III, Texas Constitution. If this
Act does not receive the vote necessary for immediate effect, this Act takes effect September 1, 2009.

Link to House Bill 3552: HERE

S.B. No. 1471

By: Gallegos

A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

AN ACT relating to the composition of certain regional planning commissions.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
SECTION 1. Section 391.003, Local Government Code, is amended by amending Subsection (a) and adding Subsection (a-1) to read as follows:
(a) Except as provided by Subsection (a-1), any [Any] combination of counties or municipalities or of counties and municipalities may agree, by ordinance, resolution, rule, order, or other means, to establish a commission.
(a-1) A county with a population of 3.3 million or more:
(1) may agree to establish a commission as provided by Subsection (a) only with municipalities located wholly or partly in the county; and
(2) may not establish a commission with another county.

SECTION 2. Not later than November 1, 2009, any county described by Section 391.003(a-1), Local Government Code, as added by this Act, participating in a regional [Previous Hit] planning [Next Hit] [Previous Hit] commission [Next Hit] that does not comply with Section 391.003(a-1), Local Government Code, as added by this Act, shall withdraw from the commission.

SECTION 3. This Act takes effect immediately if it receives a vote of two-thirds of all the members elected to each house, as provided by Section 39, Article III, Texas Constitution. If this
Act does not receive the vote necessary for immediate effect, this Act takes effect September 1, 2009.

Link to Senate Bill 1471: HERE

House Bill 4511

By: Coleman

A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

AN ACT relating to the composition of certain regional planning commissions.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
SECTION 1. Section 391.003, Local Government Code, is amended by amending Subsection (a) and adding Subsection (a-1) to read as follows:

(a) Except as provided by Subsection (a-1), any [Any] combination of counties or municipalities or of counties and municipalities may agree, by ordinance, resolution, rule, order, or other means, to establish a commission.
(a-1) A county with a population of 3.3 million or more:
(1) may agree to establish a commission as provided by Subsection (a) only with municipalities located wholly or partly in the county; and
(2) may not establish a commission with another county.

SECTION 2. Not later than November 1, 2009, any county described by Section 391.003(a-1), Local Government Code, as added by this Act, participating in a regional planning commission that does not comply with Section 391.003(a-1), Local Government Code, as added by this Act, shall withdraw from the commission.

SECTION 3. This Act takes effect immediately if it receives a vote of two-thirds of all the members elected to each house, as provided by Section 39, Article III, Texas Constitution. If this
Act does not receive the vote necessary for immediate effect, this Act takes effect September 1, 2009.

Link to House Bill 4511: HERE

Local input received on area mobility plan

2/28/09

Trinity Standard
Copyright 2009

TRINITY – A handful of suggestions for changes and additions to the local highway system were presented last week during the first of three public forums hosted by the Trinity-Neches Texas Sub-Regional Planning Commission (TNT).

Additional traffic control lights and an overpass were the needs listed by the public during the meeting regarding a draft transportation study being prepared by TNT.

During the meeting, TNT Member-at-large Connie Fogle explained that the study was being developed as a means of countering what the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) formerly called the Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC).

“State law says TxDOT’s plan must be compatible with our plan,” Fogle said. “That’s why were here today. We want to draft a mobility plan for the Trinity, Groveton and Corrigan areas and we want the public’s input.”

Fogle noted the TNT was organized last year as a means of fighting TxDOT’s plans to route the massive TTC highway system through Trinity County. By drafting a mobility plan for the area that does not include the proposed new highway route, she indicated TNT would have additional ammunition in their battle.

Fogle told the group of about a dozen audience members that while the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) has agreed that the name “Trans-Texas Corridor” is dead, the proposed route through Trinity County is not.

It was noted that in TxDOT officials have agreed to “use existing highway right-of-ways” such as U.S. 59 through East Texas for the proposed I-69 connecting Mexico to Canada, new right-of-way through Trinity County is still included in TxDOT Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) that it plans to submit to the Federal Highway Administration.

“The public didn’t like the name Trans-Texas Corridor, so (TxDOT) changed its name; and the public didn’t like the 1,200-foot-wide footprint, so they decided to narrow it where they can, but they’re still sending in the environmental impact statement as is,” Fogle said.

It was noted that some TxDOT officials now refer to the route through Trinity County as “I-69 Alt.” or alternate Interstate 69.

Fogle said the TNT will continue to work to halt the TTC and I-69 Alt. route and was seeking suggestions for things to include in the transportation plan they are now preparing.

“This is a work in progress. We will be taking suggestions tonight and at public forums planned in Groveton and Corrigan. We also will be taking written suggestions,” she added.

Among the suggestions presented during the Feb. 19 meeting, was the installation of a traffic control light on Highway 19 in front of the Trinity Brookshire Brothers grocery store.

Trinity Mayor Lyle Stubbs noted the city has been asking TxDOT for years for such a light but has always been turned down.

“They’ve got the traffic data and information on the number of accidents that have occurred there, but we still don’t have a light,” he said.

Stubbs also noted that in the past the city has asked TxDOT to put in an overpass to allow traffic on Highway 94 to cross the railroad tracks.

Stubbs, who also is a member of the Trinity Volunteer Fire Department, noted there have been incidents in the past where a train passing through the city has prevented firefighters from responded to building and other fires.

He noted that to help solve this problem, TVFD not has fire-fighting equipment on both sides of the tracks.

However, since most firefighters work on the west side of the tracks during the day, there are times where not enough manpower can get to a fire when the tracks are blocked.

“We’re probably too small to get (an overpass) but it won’t hurt to ask,” Stubbs said.
Dee Dee King of the Saron Community near Trinity suggested a caution light be placed at the intersection of Highway 94 and FM 3188 northeast of Trinity.

“It’s a dangerous place and we need at lease a flashing light there to warn people,” King said.

Fogle noted that the second public forum was held in Corrigan on Tuesday, Feb. 24, and the third and final meeting was set for 6 p.m. Thursday, Feb. 26, at the Groveton City Hall, 115 W. Front Street.

She noted the Groveton meeting had originally been set for Feb. 17 but was rescheduled due to a conflict with a girls’ basketball playoff game.

Copies of the draft mobility plans are available at the Trinity, Groveton and Corrigan city halls. Written comments will be accepted through May 20.

After comments have been received, TNT will finalize the plan and publish notices in local newspapers. Copies of the final plan will be available at the city halls for public review.

Following a 30-day comment period on the final plan, the TNT will give their final approval and deliver it to state, federal and regional transportation agencies as well as to the governor’s office.

© 2009 Trinity Standard: www.easttexasnews.com

Revised corridor plans still under review

By CLAY COPPEDGE,
Country World News

In the wake of a recent announcement that the controversial Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC) proposal is dead, Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) officials have met with several sub-regional planning commissions to clarify what projects associated with the TTC will still go forward.

Members of the sub-regional commissions, which were formed in response to the corridor, have expressed concern that while last rites for the TTC have been announced, the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the corridor has continued.

Doug Booher, an environmental specialist with the Texas Turnpike Authority, told the commission that the state EIS is continuing because individual corridor projects are still being planned.

“The documents for the EIS, as it relates to the Trans-Texas Corridor as a whole concept, have to be revised,” he said.

Mark Tomlinson, director of the Texas Turnpike Authority Division, said the TTC-35 and I-69 programs will go forward as individual projects rather than as part of a larger system. The turnpike division is responsible for toll roads and other financing options for TxDOT.

The TTC-35 project calls for a highway running roughly parallel to Interstate 35 from the Red River to the Mexican border. The I-69 project would create a highway running from Texarkana to Laredo or the Rio Grande Valley.

“The overall goal of the (EIS) document is the same,” he said. “How we plan to implement the projects has changed. For example, the overall width of the corridor projects still under consideration was conceptualized at 1,200 feet but are now closer to 600 feet.” He added that the proposed paths haven’t changed, and that the widths weren’t considered when the first proposed routes were drawn.

Gov. Rick Perry first proposed the TTC in 2002 as a $175 billion, 4,000-mile network of highways, rail and communication lines through the state. The elaborate system was designed to ease overcrowding on current highways and accommodate future growth.

The plan was controversial from the first. The massive amount of land needed for the project drew critical attention from farmers, ranchers and rural landowners.

Agriculture groups, such as the Texas Farm Bureau and others, spoke out loudly against the proposal at a series of public hearings to gather public input on the TTC.

Fred Kelly Grant, a lawyer and legal adviser for the sub-regional planning commissions, asked the officials if they have worked within the provisions of the Farmland Protection Policy Act in drafting the EIS.

“That (Farmland Protection Policy Act) is not the only factor we have to consider,” Tomlinson said. “We looked at unique farmland on both sides (of Interstate 35) but we also have to look at the Endangered Species Act, which comes into play a lot more on the western side of the highway. Until it’s an actual project, we can’t say for sure how the Farmland Protection Act will come into play.”

Richard Skopic, district engineer for TxDOT, said the federal stimulus plan could have an impact on TxDOT’s ability to fund projects like TTC-35 and I-69, but added that it is too early to tell what impact, if any, it will have.

“Part of the plan, as it stands now, calls for $27 to $30 billion for highways, bridges and transportation,” Skopic said. “I think we could expect Texas to get just under $2.5 billion. When you look at that amount of money, it’s less than what we spent on similar projects over the last five years.”

TxDOT Executive Director Amando Saenz announced at a transportation conference in Austin last month that the name Trans-Texas Corridor, as a single-project concept, is not the choice of Texans and that the name will be put to rest. He also announced the Innovative Connectivity in Texas/Vision 2009 program, which includes a policy of meeting with local groups for input on transportation projects.

Dan Byfield with the American Land Foundation, a private property rights group that advises the sub-regional commissions, said that TxDOT has held several meetings with the local commissions.

“The Pineywoods group got a letter from Amando Saenz saying that the department looks forward to working with them on the I-69 project,” he said. “That’s a step in the right direction.”

© 2009 Country World News: www.countryworldnews.com

TxDOT agrees to work with county group on project

Waller County News-Citizen

WALLER – In a letter dated Jan. 21, addressed to the Waller County Sub-Regional Planning Commission, Amadeo Saenz Jr., executive director of the Texas Department of Transportation, agreed to coordinate with the WCSRPC in regards to the plans and programs of the I-69/TTC project.

“We welcome the opportunity to work with your group on transportation issues that are important to Waller County citizens,” Saenz stated in his letter.

The letter further details that Saenz has instructed TxDOT Houston District staff to coordinate these efforts with the WCSRPC and to arrange a meeting, because the Houston District is best positioned to understand regional issues.

“This is a significant step in the process for Waller County citizens and the WCSRPC,” stated Maurice Hart Jr., president of the WCSRPC.

“As long as Waller County remains on the Environmental Impact Statement for the I-69/TTC project as an alternative route, we are going to require TxDOT to coordinate with us so that any potential project that is done in our area is consistent with the transportation and mobility plans and goals of our area and of our citizens,” Hart added.

Trey Duhon, vice president of Citizens for a Better Waller County, feels that this is a significant accomplishment for the WCSRPC, “This letter shows that TxDOT is acknowledging Chapter 391 of the Texas Local Government Code. Waller County now has the ability to sit at the table with a state agency like TxDOT as equal partners in the transportation process. The ultimate winners will be the citizens of Waller County. CBWC is extremely pleased that coordination efforts are now moving forward.”

Despite recent announcements by TxDOT that the Trans Texas Corridor project is dead, Duhon expressed caution, “After many years of working against the Trans Texas Corridor, the recent announcement is encouraging, but we can not let our guard down. The recent announcement seems to be more of a name change than anything else. As long as Waller County remains on the EIS as an alternative, there is a danger to our area. We have gone too far to relax now and get caught off guard. The WCSRPC will be an effectively tool to monitor TxDOT's real intentions.”

The WCSRPC was initially formed in April of 2008 by Waller County and the cities of Waller, Pine Island, and Prairie View. Since that time, the city of Pattison has become a member along with Waller ISD and the Brookshire Katy Drainage District, which became new members at the commission meeting that was held on Feb. 2. Don Garrett, president of CBWC, has also been appointed as a non-elected citizen director.

Hart stated, “We still have standing invitations to the cities of Hempstead, Brookshire, Katy, Hempstead ISD, Royal ISD, Bluebonnet Water District, and Emergency Services District No. 200 to be a part of the process in joining the WCSRPC. This organization will facilitate communication between Waller County cities, the county, and other important entities so that we can all work together to improve the quality of life for all Waller County citizens in relation to any state or federal project in Waller County. With TxDOT’s agreement to coordinate, it is important for everyone to have a seat at the table. We are looking forward to our first meeting with TxDOT officials.”

The Commission also voted to extend an invitation to Katy ISD to join the WCSRPC.

The WCSRPC is also looking at zip codes issues in Prairie View and Pattison, in addition to drainage issues in Waller County.

For additional information and updates on the WCSRPC, you can visit their website at http://wallercountysrpc.blogspot.com. As soon as a meeting date with TxDOT is set, the website will be updated with that date and time. The WCSRPC meets regularly at 7 p.m. on the first Monday of every month at the Road & Bridge complex in Hempstead across from DiLorio's on Business Hwy 290.

Meetings of the WSRPC are open to the public.

© 2008 Waller County News-Citizen : www.hcnonline.com

Trans-Texas Corruption

By Dan Byfield
Standing Ground

Despite what anyone may have read in the papers, the Trans-Texas Corridor is not dead. It simply has a new name. “Innovative Connectivity” sounds more like a creative science class on electricity, but it’s our state’s “new” approach to building toll roads in Texas.

There’s a reason for the name change and it’s not because the state of Texas woke up one morning with a grand new vision. The reason is the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) and Governor Rick Perry had a public relations nightmare on their hands.

The nightmare started after the Texas Legislature passed a transportation bill during the last two weeks of the 2003 Legislative Session creating the Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC). When people realized what was in it – 4,000 miles of 1,200 foot-wide, 12-lane toll roads – they became enraged.

Two Legislative Sessions went by in 2005 and 2007, and nothing of consequence changed. Governor Perry, his transportation department, and their 50-year Spanish partner still had their master plan in place and were moving at warp speed.

There appeared to be nothing that could slow, let alone stop, this high-powered, elite project.

But, then amazingly, the press reported that Amadeo Saenz, the executive director of TxDOT, announced the TTC was “dead.” No, that’s no accurate. What Amadeo Saenz said was: “The Trans-Texas Corridor, as a single project concept, is not the choice of Texans. So we’ve decided to put the name to rest.”

That’s what’s known as the Texas two-step. All TxDOT did was change the name because the TTC had become such a political liability. But listen to the rest of what Mr. Saenz said.

“As of today (January 6, 2009), we are unveiling a new corridor program that makes use of all the innovative project development tools we have. This new plan, called Innovative Connectivity in Texas/Vision 2009 (now that’s real catchy) will usher in this new method of operation. Projects that had been developed under the heading of the Trans-Texas Corridor will now become a series of individual projects. To be clear: the Trans-Texas Corridor as it was known will no longer exist.”

Clearly, Amadeo was under a lot of stress and strain. The Texas Legislature was going into session exactly one week after this grandiose announcement and a few legislative members were calling for the elimination of his position. Clearly, TxDOT and the TTC were going to be the center of attention and without the ousted Speaker Craddick at the helm in the House, Governor Perry had to do something to head off the angry mob that was about to lynch his pet project.

It was a shrewd political maneuver that not only more than likely saved TxDOT’s and Saenz’ collective necks, but gave cover to every politician from the Governor on down to say the “TTC is dead.”

The announcement did exactly what the Governor wanted – it minimized public criticism, relieved immediate pressure to do something politically, and gave those who don’t want anything to change the opportunity to get through 140 days with no real deal busters so they can continue their scheme immediately upon the Legislature leaving Austin.

TTC Cash Cow

There’s another reason why the TTC isn’t dead. Over the past two Legislative Sessions, 67 lobbyists have been paid more than $6 million to make sure the TTC remained intact. Then, there are the dozens of corporate contributors making campaign contributions to all those legislators on the transportation take including Lt. Governor David Dewhurst at $466,850, Governor Rick Perry raking in $354,450, and that back-stabbing Senate Transportation Committee Chairman John Carona stuffing his pockets with $41,000 – just to name a few. (Click Here to View TTC Recipients Charts )

Since the TTC statute was passed, TxDOT, according to their own Web site, has spent an impressive $131 million, including $30.7 million in the fiscal year that ended August 31, 2008, just on engineering and environmental studies. The total includes $59.4 million for the I-35 corridor, $67.9 million for the I-69 corridor, with a few more million on other toll roads and loops around major metropolitan areas that will complete the TTC from one end of the state to the other.

TxDOT also received a $25 million payment from Cintra, the Spanish consortium in 2005, to build the 300-mile 130 toll road from east of San Antonio to Oklahoma parallel to I-35. The road isn’t supposed to be part of the TTC, but it’s as close to the preferred route as they have come and already has 90 miles constructed. Cintra will receive toll revenue from the project for the next 50 years. TxDOT is now saying 130 will be expanded to become the TTC 35, but that’s only speculation at this point.

Local People Fight Back

The real nightmare for TxDOT and the reason they had to divert the heat came as a direct response to four small, rural communities that took the advice to form sub-regional planning commissions and demand coordination.

With all the lobbyists, attorneys, engineers, and politicians working diligently to get this corrupt project off the ground, they failed to notice one obscure, but powerful state law. A law that has forced TxDoT, Texas Parks and Wildlife, and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality to the table of local people to coordinate their plans and policies.

We discovered Chapter 391 of the Texas Local Government Code that allows cities and/or counties to form regional planning commissions for just about any purpose, including transportation. The most important and brilliant section of that statute happened to be added by State Representative Rob Junell (D-San Angelo) in 2001. It reads:

“In carrying out their planning and program development responsibilities, state agencies shall, to the greatest extent feasible, coordinate planning with commissions to ensure effective and orderly implementation of state programs at the regional level.” §391.009 (c), Texas Local Government Code.

None of the politicians and lobbyists knew we had found the language that gave local government the power to force the almighty Texas Department of Transportation to the table and begin coordination proceedings. We knew prior to the beginning of the 2007 Session, but we told no one.

First 391 Commission Formed

After the Session ended in May of 2007, we met Ralph and Marcia Snyder, who had been fighting the TTC for years, but were frustrated because nothing was working to stop the toll road. We explained the 391 statute to Ralph and off he went to sell the idea to his local city and school leaders.

Within a few weeks, the cities of Bartlett, Holland, Little River-Academy, Rogers, and their school districts formed the first of nine sub-regional planning commissions. It was called the Eastern Central Texas Sub-Regional Planning Commission (ECTSRPC). TxDOT was immediately notified and by October of 2007, they held their first coordination meeting with the state transportation department. It was the first time in five years TxDOT was not in charge of a meeting dealing with the Trans-Texas Corridor.

The ECTSRPC has not only met with TxDOT, but Texas Parks and Wildlife, the Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, the Natural Resources Conservation Service, and have a third meeting scheduled with TxDOT in February.
Overall, the ECTSRPC has pointed out specific violations of the National Environmental Policy Act with a 26-page indictment of everything they have failed to do through their Environmental Impact Study. That document has also been sent to the Federal Highway Administration requesting a supplemental Environmental Impact Study be done. The local group instigated a federal study through NRCS that should have been done by TxDOT, but never was, showing how construction of the massive toll road will destroy critical prime farmland known as the Blackland Prairie. And, they have set the precedent for other 391 commissions to demand state and federal agencies coordinate this transportation project before any concrete gets poured.

Other 391’s Formed

The second 391 commission to form on the I-35 Corridor was the South Central Texas Sub-Regional Planning Commission southeast of San Antonio, Texas. The city of St. Hedwig and Wilson County formed the planning commission in the summer of 2008. Since then, they have added Marion City, Guadalupe County, and the East Central Independent School District. They are looking to add one more city and two more school districts to their commission.

Kathy Palmer, president of the commission stated: “We decided to meet with our neighbors and form a commission when we realized state officials were planning a Trans-Texas Corridor route that bisected our city — and nobody at the state level had contacted anyone at St. Hedwig to discuss it.”

Since forming, Palmer says coordination works. The SCTSRPC met with TxDOT in which the state engineer for the TTC project admitted the local group was better organized and “further along” in their planning stage than ever realized. Their meeting with TxDOT is the first time they’ve been able to express any meaningful issues with the state agency. “We in the St. Hedwig, Wilson County area and our neighbors will no longer be ignored when it comes to federal and state agencies making changes in our area without them first having a true understanding of what those changes mean to our citizens,” stated Palmer.

TxDOT has agreed to a second meeting in February. TxDOT has also agreed to use the 391 commission for “local” input and not go through the state-created advisory committees. “That is a major concession we were able to get from the state because we used coordination,” stated Palmer.

I-69 Corridor

TXDOT has a second high priority TTC corridor that runs along the eastern side of the state, bypassing Houston and connecting to Louisiana and Oklahoma. When the I-69/TTC was initially planned, it was to be a new Interstate that connected through several states ending in Indiana. TXDOT converted the project into a TTC superhighway, changing what was once a needed highway into a Texas sized controversy. The people didn’t want it, and turned out by the thousands to the public meetings to protest.

While the agency was finishing up their public hearing process on the Draft EIS for the corridor, four sub regional planning commissions were also forming along the route. The first two that organized, the Trinity Neches Texas Sub-Regional (TNTSRPC) and the Piney Woods Sub-Regional (PWSRPC) immediately noticed TXDOT that they would be required to coordinate the project with them. Both Commissions were in the path of the preferred new corridor alternative being pushed by TXDOT.

TXDOT made its first major slight of hand and publicly announced they would no longer be considering the new corridor as their preferred route. They then used this public stunt as a reason to tell the new Commissions that meeting with them was unnecessary, because they were no longer in danger.

The Commissions disagreed, and while TXDOT was arguing the need to meet with TNT, EPA Region 6 didn’t hesitate to hear from the local communities. TNT prepared a workbook for the agency with statements and detailed accounts from their school districts, sheriffs, water districts and other entities as to the human impact that would occur in the area which TXDOT had failed to study as required under the federal law.

When TXDOT finally agreed to meet with TNT, they brought with them a representative from the Federal Highway Administration. The Chairman of the Commission, Bob Dockens, asked the FHA rep if would provide a letter to the TNT which backed up his statement that the new corridor alternative was off the table. The rep said that he couldn’t make that guarantee from the FHA.

Connie Fogle, who spearheaded the effort to form TNT and the PW, says the TNT Commission has no plans to go away. In fact, they have now held their second meeting with TXDOT and are preparing for more.

The Piney Woods Commission took it a step further. In their first meeting with TXDOT, Doug Booher who is in charge of the environmental study, committed to President Hank Gilbert that the Commission would see the final EIS before it was sent to the FHA for approval – a clear signal that TXDOT understands its coordination duty to the local commissions.

TxDOT Responds

Immediately after the first 391 commission formed, TxDOT was on the defensive. For the first time, local people had a voice. TxDOT began with announcing several changes.

1. Agency Regulations

After being notified by the ECTSRPC that TxDOT had ignored local governments and would now be required to coordinate their plans with them, TxDOT rolled out a new set of Transportation regulations trying to undermine the authority of the 391 commissions.

These new regulations actually contained language that TxDOT would “coordinate with local communities” and gather advice from rural areas. However, the agency reserved the right to ignore their input. Not the case under Chapter 391 of the Texas Code where the agency must coordinate – defined as equal in rank and order, not subservient -- with the local governments. We still had TxDOT in a bind they could not ignore. They are required by state statute to coordinate their plans and policies with every 391 commission.

2. Advisory Committees

Then, in another effort to try and prevent from having to meet with local commissions, TxDOT formed Corridor Advisory Committees and Corridor Segment Committees to get “input from local leaders and various segments of the community.” However, TxDOT appointed the individuals that would serve on these “advisory” committees and had no obligation to listen to or take their advice. This was in direct response to the demands placed upon them by the 391 commissions requiring they coordinate their plans and policies. If need be, TxDOT wanted to be able to explain to a judge that they were “coordinating” with local people through their “ordained” advisory committees.

3. Rural Planning Organizations

TxDOT then came up with yet another scheme to make it appear as though they too had rural planning committees that were “advising” them on rural issues. They decided to use existing state Councils of Governments (COGs) to implement a new strategy called Rural Planning Organizations (RPOs), which would design transportation plans for rural areas outside the metropolitan areas of the state.

Amadeo Saenz said TxDOT had come up with federal dollars to reimburse the COGs to implement these RPOs and would be asking the state Legislature to codify their idea into law during the 2009 Session. Again, these RPOs are TxDOT’s attempt to thwart what the nine sub-regional planning commissions have forced them to do through coordination.

4. The I-69 Corridor “Dead”

Witnessing the effectiveness of the ECTSRPC on I-35 Corridor, local governments in East Texas formed three more 391 commissions for the I-69 Corridor. Once these commissions started forming and demanding coordination, TxDOT released a statement saying they would no longer be building a new corridor for I-69, but would instead use existing roads and highways for the project. This new strategy was designed to quiet the opposition to the new corridor, at least until the elections passed.

While many bought the public relations ploy, the Trinity-Neches Texas SRPC (TNT) and the Piney Woods SRPC weren’t fooled. TNT requested a letter from TxDOT’s Lufkin District Engineer confirming in writing that the new corridor was off the table.

What they received instead was acknowledgement that the new corridor would still be a part of the Final Environmental Impact Study (FEIS). The regulations allow an agency to change their alternative after the study has been finalized, as long as the route was studied in the original FEIS. TxDOT’s slight of hand was exposed and people realized they were just trying to deflect any opposition to their plan.

Later, the FHA representative refused to provide TNT with a letter confirming that the new corridor alternative would not be considered by the FHA.

5. The “TTC is Dead”

Then came the final announcement that the TTC was “dead” as explained above. For one and a half years, four 391 commissions have forced TxDOT into playing defense. Every time a commission has had a coordination meeting with the state, they have gone back to Austin and devised yet another plan to avoid accounting for the true impact of their super-corridor plans. This latest ploy of announcing the TTC is dead proves local people have tremendous power when they are organized and utilize the law in their benefit.

Coordination Times Nine

To date, there are nine 391 Commissions formed in Texas, with at least one Commission on each of the 3 north-south corridors. The Eastern Central Commission has since increased its jurisdiction by adding one more town and their school district placing a 30-mile wide gap in a critical part of the path of the I-35 super-corridor.

Chapter 391 of the Local Government Code requiring state agencies to coordinate with local governments will likely come under attack during the 2009 Legislative Session. Governor Perry cannot tolerate his pet project being derailed. There has been too much money paid to him, other politicians, lobbyists, and the state just to throw in the towel.

People have found a way to fight back. Hopefully, if the law gets changed those commissions that formed will be grandfathered and those areas will be able to continue the fight.

But, had it not been for the bravery of four small, rural towns in Bell County, Texas, with a combined population of less than 6,000 forming the first 391 commission, the condemnation of private property for the corridor would have already begun and pavement would have been poured.

How this fight will ultimately be resolved is unknown, but the Commissions have prepared the necessary groundwork to challenge the project in court and TxDOT has sufficiently ignored enough laws to make even the most hesitant judge skeptical of the state’s agenda.

Stewards of the Range and the American Land Foundation are committed to going the distance with the sub-regional planning commissions. For them, it is a matter of losing their local economies and way of life. For us, it is about losing more of our national sovereignty and private property. For every American it is about further eroding our economy and security.

Thankfully, the unassuming phrase “coordination” was waiting to be used, and once revealed, these local officials didn’t hesitate. The job is far from over, but as Kathy Palmer said: “We’re not going to back down” and TxDOT and our governor know it.

Click Here to View TTC Recipients Charts

Standing Ground is published by: Stewards of the Range, American Land Foundation & Liberty Matters
Executive Editors: Dan and Margaret Byfield
Publication Deisgner: Kelley Black
Editorial Office:
P.O. Box 1190
Taylor, TX 76574
(512) 365-8038
email
Members of Stewards of the Range, American Land Foundation and Liberty Matters receive
Standing Ground as part of membership. To order additional copies, call our offices (1-800-700-5922).
Standing Ground can be made available in bulk quantities. Please call for pricing.
Permission to reproduce articles is granted with proper attribution to the author and publishers.

Stewards of the Range is a 501 (c)(3) non-profit organization

© 2009 Standing Ground: www.standingground.us

TNT Committee meets with TxDOT concerning I-69, TTC issues

The Groveton News

The Trinity-Neches Texas Sub-Regional Planning Commission (TNT) met for the second time with TxDOT last week in Trinity.

TxDOT arrived with a large contingent of representatives. Among them were District Engineer, Dennis Cooley out of Lufkin and two other engineers, Doug Booher, an Environmental Specialist with TxDOT, brought two consultants from PBSJ and Joe Krejci with the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration, Texas Division.

TNT also had full representation: the Mayors of Trinity, Corrigan, and Groveton, representatives from the Commission’s Water Suppliers, School Boards, Cattle Ranchers, Members-At-Large and concerned citizens.

TNT gave Mr. Cooley and Mr. Booher a letter formally requesting that TxDOT rescind the I-69 Trans-Texas Corridor Draft Environmental Impact Study and that TxDOT start the entire process over including a study of the existing facilities alternative.

Connie Fogle said that TNT’s legal council, Fred Kelly Grant, Attorney and President of Stewards of the Range, prepared a Legal Analysis that was given to TxDOT, which stated:

“The Administration Must Resolve Objections as to Consistency Raised by the Sub-regional Planning Commission Prior to Issuing a Final EIS for Public Review and Comment”.

Fogle said, “If, in fact the TTC is dead, why waste more time and money sending a document to the Federal Highway Administration for approval of a project they do not intend to build?”

Three TNT Members-At–Large presented information to TxDOT: Dee Dee King gave a presentation on what the I-69 TTC will do to some of our Historical Cemeteries and Archeological Sites, Bill Fogle discussed the noise factor, which will make it un-inhabitable to live within one mile of the Corridor and Craig Whealy discussed numerous environmental issues.

Also on the agenda TNT approved forming a Transportation Planning Committee to study the mobility needs of the three cities that make up the Commission. Each city will have a separate Public Forum in February to gather input.

Fogle feels that TNT is very fortunate to have the guidance of The American Land Foundation and Stewards of the Range helping their Commission through the Coordination process.

© 2009 East Texas News News: www.easttexasnews.com

Rescind I-69 TTC from the FEIS

BEFORE it is sent to the FHWA

Connie Fogle
Trinity-Neches Texas SRPC

Our TNT Commission appreciates Mr. Boohers comments, but, what the Trinity-Neches Texas Sub-Regional Planning Commission is pursuing is for TxDOT to rescind the I-69 TTC altogether from the FEIS, before they send it on to the Federal Highway Administration.

Mr. Booher has stated that TxDOT cannot do what we asked without starting a new study all over again. Which is exactly what we feel needs to be done.

TNT's question for TxDOT is: why waste more tax dollars and time having a study approved, by the EPA and The Federal Highway Administration, for a plan which TxDOT does not really feel they will pursue?"

New Alternative to TTC Announced

By: Coleman Swierc
KTRE-TV

TRINITY, TX - Just weeks ago, the Trans-Texas Corridor plans were dissolved by the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT).

Today in Trinity, alternative plans were revealed. "They are going to pursue in writing, with the Federal Highway Commission, the upgrade of 59 to I-69," said Bob Dockens, President of the Trinity-Neches Sub-Regional Planning Commission, "and are going to, according to their statement today, abandon what was called the preferred corridor, the one that ran west of Houston and came through Trinity county."

In essence, the proposed Trans-Texas Corridor, was originally to run as a connector from I-10 west of Houston, through much of Walker, Trinity, and parts of Angelina county, was eliminated.

Now, TxDOT, is proposing the upgrade of U.S. Highway 59, to the new, Interstate 69.
"We are not going to recommend the study area that was in this area," said TxDOT representative Doug Booher, "we are going to recommend to the federal highway administration that the study area for I-69 be U.S. 59."

With the new proposal to upgrade 59, new environmental issues have come up.
Members of the Trinity-Neches Texas Sub-Regional Planning Commission questioned members of TxDOT, on their initial enviromental proposal, claiming crutial historical sites were overlooked.

TxDOT defended thier proposal, stating that the initial tier 1 analysis of the study area, was taken on a very broad range.

"The original study, was at a very high phase, and although it did consider those things, it did not drill down into the very high level of detail we would do if the project would continue into the second phase," said Booher.

They also assured the commission, that pending approval of the 59 upgrade, that TxDOT would consider environmental issues in much greater detail.

Booher reiterated, "If the project were to proceed, we would take into consideration all of the specific individual concerns, such as cemetaries, historic buildings, archealogical resources, wetlands, all manner of things."

Dockens and the committee seemed to agree, "I was very satisfied with the answers that Mr. Booher gave us today."

According to TxDOT, an announcement on the new environmental issues and upgrade possibilites to 59, will be announced in the following months.

© 2008 KTRE-TV: www.ktre.com

PWSRPC Hosts Meeting with TxDOT, EPA Feb 5th

Press Release
Piney Woods SRPC
Copyright 2009

The Piney Woods Sub-Regional Planning Commission (PWSRPC) took another step in the process of maintaining local control of future highway construction during a meeting held with TxDOT representatives last week.

The over-flow capacity crowd of public supporters caused the PWSRPC-TxDOT meeting to be moved to a much larger meeting room in the Nacogdoches County Courthouse Annex. This did not miss the attention of the three TxDOT officials, two of which were from the Austin Office, and the panel of consultants TxDOT brought with them, as nearly a hundred local citizens turned out to hear the Planning Commission's President, Hank Gilbert, grill TxDOT as to their plans.

Doug Booher, 'on the scene' Environmental Manager stated, "We're not going to pursue the 4,000 mile network. We are going to continue to pursue two individual projects; one of them would be the I-35 corridor project and the other one would be the I-69 corridor project."
When asked the question from the attending audience about a loop that once was planned to go around the West side of Nacogdoches, Booher stated, "I'm sure those plans would be dusted off and looked at again."

He also stated the name 'Trans Texas Corridor' would be 'phased out' and mentioned several times that tolling and public/private partnerships (by foreign investors) would still be an option in TxDOT's transportation plans.

Hank Gilbert also expressed to PWSRPC members that he is concerned about legislation Governor Perry may try to pass that would eliminate SRPC's, such as the Piney Woods. "We have people watching out for such legislation and if it is introduced, we will need for the citizens of Texas to call their Representatives and let them know that they want to keep their local SRPC's," Gilbert stated.

The strong show of public support for the PWSRPC's meeting with TxDOT validates the desire of the public for input and information.

The NEXT Piney Woods Sub-Regional Planning Commission meeting will be with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Representatives on Thursday, February 5, at 10:00 a.m. in the Nacogdoches County Annex.

This will also be an open meeting and the public is urged to attend. As Board Member Larry Shelton has stated, "You are either at the table or you are on the menu."

© Piney Woods Sub-Regional Planning Commission: www.pineywoodssrpc.blogspot.com

Despite name change, TTC still exists

Nannette Kilbey-Smith
Wilson County News

ST. HEDWIG — As the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) unveiled its “updated vision” for the Tran-Texas Corridor (TTC) Jan. 6, members of the South Central Texas Sub-Regional Planning Commission (391 Commission) watched with interest.

The commission formed to coordinate with TxDOT on transportation issues and concerns in the local area, primarily the impact of the TTC.

“The Trans-Texas Corridor, as it was originally envisioned, is no more,” TxDOT spokesman Karen Amacker told San Antonio’s WOAI News that day.

“Texans have spoken, and we’ve been listening,” said TxDOT Executive Director Amadeo Saenz in Austin, quoted in a TxDOT press release. “… I believe this transformed vision for the TTC and other major corridor development goes a long way toward addressing the concerns we’ve heard over the past several years.”

The local 391 Commission held its regularly scheduled meeting in St. Hedwig the following day. High on the list of updates were the latest revelations on the TTC. Commission President Kathy Palmer of St. Hedwig cautioned all present against celebrating the end of the TTC just yet.

“Yesterday, it was reported that the TTC was dead,” Palmer told members. “Actually, what’s dead is the name. The concept is still in place.

“It’s a little different,” she continued, adding that the width of the proposed transportation corridor has been scaled down from 1,200 feet to no more than 600 feet.

“Now, rather than a single-concept project, this will be a series of projects,” Palmer said. TxDOT will refer to the smaller projects by their segment names, for example, State Highway (S.H.) 130 or Loop 1604.

“They’re still thinking of the corridor as a whole to move goods from seaports to the north,” Palmer said. “San Antonio to Dallas is the priority now.”

The reason for the renaming of the project, Palmer said, is that the Texas Legislature is beginning its new session.

“The TTC had such negative connotations, TxDOT feared the Legislature would pull all funding for it,” Palmer explained. “Unless the draft environmental impact study [now awaiting approval with the Federal Highway Administration] and all funding is pulled, all that we heard in the last four years on this project is still a possibility.”

The new name TxDOT is using for the project is “Innovative Connectivity in Texas|Vision 2009.” View the full document HERE.

New segment committees have been formed to discuss individual projects that comprise the TTC. Palmer told the commission new rules for segment committees had been adopted; new representation would be invited by TxDOT to share citizen concerns with the committees.

New representatives on the 391 Commission include Marion city Councilman James Gray, Guadalupe County commissioners Judy Cope and Cesareo Guadarrama III, and East Central Independent School Board (ISD) President Steve Bryant.

Other entities with invitations to join the commission include the city of La Vernia, the La Vernia ISD, and the Marion ISD.

In other business, members raised issues to discuss with TxDOT during the commission’s next workshop, Feb. 25. Items include:

• The potential increase in traffic from S.H. 130 on I-10 from Seguin to Loop 410 when S.H. 130 is complete.

• Landowner access on stretches of S.H. 130 in Guadalupe County where properties will be split by the proposed roadway.

• The impact on bus routes on small arterial roads within the East Central ISD if TTC construction begins.

• The impact of potential TTC construction on residential access in Wilson and Bexar counties on F.M. 3432 and U.S. 87.

• The impact of potential TTC rail and/or vehicular routes on the city of Marion, its school district, and its emergency services.

Members also agreed to cap the number of entities represented on the local 391 Commission; member entities can be municipalities, school districts, counties, and water utilities. At present, five entities are represented: the cities of St. Hedwig and Marion, Wilson and Guadalupe counties, and the East Central ISD.

Wilson County Pct. 4 Commissioner Larry Wiley expressed concern over the growth of the commission.

“If we get too large, we lose the interconnectivity we have with each other,” he said. “But I want to leave open the prospect for adding other entities that may need to join.”

“Some possible member entities already have a voice, because they have a seat at commissioners court,” Wilson County Judge Marvin Quinney said.

Bryant expressed concerns that Bexar County was not represented at the table, except by his district.

St. Hedwig city Councilman Susann Baker recommended capping the membership at eight entities and an adjustment to the bylaws to reflect this; the item met with full approval by the commission.

The 391 Commission will meet again Wednesday, Feb. 25, at 2 p.m. in the St. Hedwig City Hall. Although the meeting is open to the public, it will be a workshop with TxDOT; therefore, no public input will be permitted, Palmer said.

© 2009 Wilson County News: www.wilsoncountynews.com

TxDOT says TTC is dead; opponents not so sure

The Trinity Standard
Copyright 2009

AUSTIN – The death of the Trans-Texas Corridors (TTC) and the birth of a less ambitious highway plan was announced Tuesday by state officials in Austin.

During the Fourth Annual Texas Transportation Forum hosted by the Texas Department of Transportation in Austin, major changes in the state’s highway plans were unveiled.

Amadeo Saenz Jr., TxDOT’s executive director, said the ambitious proposal to create the TTC superhighways was being dropped and is being replaced by a plan to carry out road projects at an incremental, modest pace.

“The Trans-Texas Corridor, as it is known, no longer exists,” Saenz said.

The TxDOT official said the state will move forward with modification to proposed projects and will seek more input from Texans through additional town hall meetings and an updated Web site.

Saenz said the changes in the TxDOT plan are detailed in Innovative Connectivity in Texas/Vision 2009.

He indicated the change was in response to the large public outcry raised last year to the TTC proposal.

The plan called for up to 10 toll lanes – six for passenger vehicles and four for trucks – as well as six rail lines and a corridor to carry utility lines.

One of the TTC highways that was the center of heated opposition throughout East Texas was the Interstate 69/TTC. Under this plan, TxDOT proposed to extend I-69 through the region using the TTC concept.

Its proposed route would include a segment which followed the U.S. 59 corridor south from Nacogdoches through Lufkin down to Corrigan. There it would follow a new track westward through Trinity County south of U.S. 287 and then turn southeast near Trinity toward Walker County.

Under this plan, up to 5,800 acres of Trinity County land would be needed for the TTC right-of-way.

During a public hearing hosted Feb. 7, 2008, a standing-room-only crowd of opponents filled the Trinity High School gym to voice their concerns for the plan and the disruptions such a highway would cause.

In June 2008, TxDOT announced it was dropping the route through Trinity County and planned to stick to the U.S. 59 corridor all the way to Houston.

Saenz restated that position on Tuesday and noted that if the I-69 projected needed more lanes than currently existed for U.S. 59, the state will simply widen the roadway.

He added that should toll lanes be added to various roads, tolls would be assessed only on the new lanes and not those that currently exist.

Last year in response to the TTC plan, the cities of Trinity, Groveton and Corrigan formed The Trinity-Neches Texas Sub-Regional Planning Commission (TNT) to oppose the proposed TTC corridor through Trinity County.

State law gives commissions such as the TNT authority to negotiate highway changes with TxDOT and organizers hoped to use this power to challenge the TTC plan.

Connie Fogle of Trinity, a vocal critic of the TTC and a member of the TNT, said Tuesday that while she hopes TxDOT is being straightforward about the change, she and other TNT members have strong doubts.

“It would be wonderful if this were true, but I’m not so sure that it is,” she said, adding that in the past, TxDOT has played a game of “smoke and mirrors” to try to relieve public pressure.

“You know they are under pressure over this. The public was up in arms during the public hearings last year and the legislature’s Sunset Commission really raked TxDOT over the coals,” she said.

Fogle said she believes TxDOT hopes announcements such as this will prevent other sub-regional planning commissioners from forming.

“We, and other commissions, have been a real thorn in TxDOT’s side and this probably is a response to that,” she added.

She noted that despite the June announcement that TxDOT would follow the existing U.S. 59 route through East Texas, the Trinity County TTC corridor is still included in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) that is being forwarded to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA).

“As long as the Trinity County route is still included in the DEIS, its still alive. If the DEIS is approved at the federal level, TxDOT could come back someday and say, ‘Oh, you know we tried to do it this way (follow U.S. 59), but it just didn’t work so we’re going to have to go back to the Trinity County route’,” she said.

She noted that TNT attorneys obtained copies of TxDOT’s Innovative Connectivity in Texas/Vision 2009 and are currently reviewing it.

“They already have noted that, as usual, TxDOT is leaving itself loopholes,” she noted.

She noted that in their announcement, TxDOT said the highway right-of-ways for things like the I-69 project would be no more than 600-feet wide – which is down from the 1,200-foot wide TTC plan.

“When our attorneys got to looking at the plan in detail, they found that it said the right-of-way would be not more than 600 feet ‘in most cases.’ They are not really limiting themselves, even though they are saying they are,” she said.

Fogle said despite the TxDOT announcement, the TNT will continue to operate to insure that the rights of local residents are protected.

They are scheduled to meet with local TxDOT officials during their next regular meeting set for 9 a.m. on Wednesday, Jan. 21, at the Trinity City Hall.

© 2009 The Trinity Standard: www.easttexasnews.com