TLOTA/General funding legislation

[JCL]

I'm reading news articles on the local option tax and I'm not understanding what's happened and what the implications are. Is the measure dead dead, or just kinda dead like will be brought back in another form? Does that mean all the lines on that pretty 2030 map outside DART/T/DCTA will go away? Will the RTC of the COG back off of it's restriction that no more agencies besides the current 3 be formed?

[saxman66]

This may answer some of that:

Legislature adjourns without resolving TxDOT issues
The Associated Press - June 1, 2009, 8:59PM

AUSTIN, Texas — The Texas Legislature has adjourned its session without
resolving a dispute over the Texas Department of Transportation and $2 billion
in road-building bonds. Monday's end of the session raises the likelihood that
lawmakers will be called back to continue their work in a special session.

(A section of House Bill 300, The TxDOT Sunset Review, would have called for a
Rail Division at TxDOT).

Gov. Rick Perry would have to call a special session, which could last up to 30
days.

The sticking point was $2 billion in transportation funding that the House
failed to pass before gaveling out the 2009 regular session.

Angry Republican senators said it was preferable to quit and let Perry call them
back to work. Several Democrats argued against the move, saying it was dangerous
to begin the shutdown process of major agencies

[JCL]

So nothing has been resolved and it's all still up in the air?

It sounds like the major opposition to the TLOTA came from lawmakers in Houston. Is this a DFW vs. Houston issue?

[electricron]

Basically, the Texas House was against increasing any taxes, favoring selling $2 Billion in state bonds to fund new highways. I have no idea how the House planned to pay off those bonds. The Texas Senate wanted to also allow counties to charge additional taxes to pay off their own bonds for local transportation projects, but the House was supposedly strongly against, but its leadership never allowed a vote. During reconciliation between the House and Senate bills, weak self centered Senators gave in to strong House members mainly because our Lt. Governor didn't appoint strong Senators to the reconciliation committee. The reconciled Transportation bill never made it to a vote in either the House or Senate, so the promised filibuster by Sen Carona never occurred. The reconcilled bill was dead on arrival in the Senate, surprisingly it was also dead on arrival in the House too.
That's what happens when Legislators in the committee to reconcile bills reconcile against the wishes of their fellow members. Instead of compromising for the greater good, taking the best from each house, they kept the worse and the reconciled bill neither house wanted died a silent death.

Therefore, TXDOT's authorization wasn't renewed. TXDOT's funding wasn't renewed. TXDOT's bonding authority wasn't renewed (worth $2 Billion during FY 2010). TXDOT's appropriations wasn't renewed.

Other State agencies also fell victim to our legislature failing to finish its business by the deadline. I assume the Governor will have to call a special session to at least reauthorized and refund them.

As it stands now, the local option tax is dead. Who knows what will happen in the future. Meanwhile, the idea of "waiting until the next legislature" to tackle transportation funding is unacceptable to North Texas. We heard those same dishonest remarks the past three sessions.

I don't want to hear those opposed to increase taxes say we shouldn't increase taxes during a recession, because they said the same two and four years ago, when the economy was booming. I don't want to hear that they're against the taxes proposed either, without STATING HOW THEY PLAN TO FUND needed transportation projects in Texas' metro areas.

[mjblazin]

I think there was more to it than House members being reflexively against taxes. People don't care about taxes that they don't pay. Why would House members across the state be concerned about taxes in one small section of the state? I also find it hard to reconcile reading puff pieces in the DMN about new power shift in the House with the idea that anti-tax Republicans squelched this measure. Something else is in play and we should get to the root cause before again running towards the castle with a ladder.

[Spjz]

I think there was more to it than House members being reflexively against taxes. People don't care about taxes that they don't pay.I'll let AeroD speculate (or kiss and tell) as to what was going on behind the scenes during the session, but as far as I'm concerned, it really was that simple.

Even though there's only 40-something miles of track, the current DART system has had quite an effect on the way people view the future of North Texas transportation. I'm planning on moving back to DFW in 2010. We haven't decided where we are going to look for a house, but I can guarantee you we won't move to a suburb that is not served by DART, period. I'm more than happy to pay the extra sales tax, property tax, gas tax, toll tax, or whatever else tax in order to have transportation options beyond a congested freeway system. Conservatives in the legislature and around the state are scared that people like me - and I'm certainly not alone - will embrace higher taxes to achieve this result. The bill was defeated because its opponents knew that North Texas Counties would vote in favor of paying the new taxes and building the infrastructure. They're also afraid that other, smaller metro areas will want to hop on the bandwagon so they can connect via rail with the major cities.

In the end, this is more than just a transportation issue, it's a contest between two cultures. The silly thing is that it really doesn't have to be.

[msutton]

It's just the typical Conservative stance -- "what I think is morally right for me is morally right for everyone," and vice-versa. Even if the potential tax wouldn't directly effect them, the idea of an added tax is, like abortion, so fundamentally repulsive to them that they don't think anyone should be allowed to make a reasoned, educated decision for themselves. Call it moral superiority, fascism (if you're Michael Moore), or "maintaining the moral and fiscal integrity" of Texas/America/The World, or what you will.

[AeroD]

reconciliation between the House and Senate bills, weak self centered Senators gave in to strong House members mainly because our Lt. Governor didn't appoint strong Senators to the reconciliation committee.

Why do you think the Lt. Governor did not appoint "strong Senators"?

I could explain the politics, but more often than not explaining politics is harder than explaining physics.

I do favor a local option tax.

But with that said, there is a policy reason beyond just "I don't want new taxes, I want the road fairy to build the roads" to oppose or least strongly question LOTA.

One of the policy arguments against RMAs was that we would be creating "mini-TxDOTs" across the state. Why bother even having TxDOT if local jurisdictions are going to be shouldering the burden? This argument is one that is pushed by a rather influential transportation policy maker.

The same could be said for LOTA. What you are doing is basically creating mini-TxDOTs. If that is the case, why have TxDOT?

I understand that the LOTA is a response to the state's inaction in transportation planning. But what does LOTA mean for future state transportation planning? Does TxDOT only then focus on intercity and rural transportation, while local governments assume responsibility for intracity transportation?

And yes, ideology has tainted the transportation debate, those same people who don't want to pay taxes...I would actually call them user fees...also hate CDAs because they think Cabeza de Vaca is going to reconquer Texas for Queen Isabella.

So 'til then we wait for the Road Fairy to sprinkle magic road and rail dust across the state. :nuts:

[JCL]

I know that no one knows the future but:



The same could be said for LOTA. What you are doing is basically creating mini-TxDOTs. If that is the case, why have TxDOT?


If TLOTA isn't the answer... then what is? Do we need $6/gal gas to get everyone moving?

[Spjz]

^We already go straight to the Federal Transportation Administration to cover the cost of a considerable amount of DART's capital improvements. Maybe we should just give up on Austin altogether and depend on D.C. Our Governor should get a real kick out of that.

[Hannibal Lecter]

^We already go straight to the Federal Transportation Administration to cover the cost of a considerable amount of DART's capital improvements. Maybe we should just give up on Austin altogether and depend on D.C. Our Governor should get a real kick out of that.Or we could decide to be men and women, and not parasites, and take care of our own.

[ksig121]

Or we could decide to be men and women, and not parasites, and take care of our own.

Which is what we tried to do in Austin, but got shot down...

[electricron]

Why do you think the Lt. Governor did not appoint "strong Senators"?
One of the policy arguments against RMAs was that we would be creating "mini-TxDOTs" across the state. Why bother even having TxDOT if local jurisdictions are going to be shouldering the burden? This argument is one that is pushed by a rather influential transportation policy maker.
The same could be said for LOTA. What you are doing is basically creating mini-TxDOTs. If that is the case, why have TxDOT?

Good questions. The answers are simple. TXDOT doesn't fund anything but highways. TXDOT doesn't fund bus or rail transit agencies. All the highway construction projects going forward into construction in Collin, Dallas, Denton, and Tarrant Counties are not 100% funded by TXDOT. That's why so many of them are 100% Toll Roads (built by the North Texas Tollway Agency) or have Tolled Managed Lanes (Private-Public-Partnerships). If TXDOT was funding them 100% by gas taxes, there wouldn't be a need for tolls set up by local agencies.

The answer to why local funding is requested mainly rests with TXDOT's inability to finance and build new highways. Add the fact that TXDOT has never funded railroad and bus transit agencies, why should local transit agencies look at TXDOT for funding?

Every large city in Texas has a rail project it would like to finance.
Dallas > Dart light rail & commuter rail projects
Fort Worth > T commuter rail projects
Houston > Metro light rail & commuter rail projects, plus Houston-Galveston commuter rail project
San Antonio > Possible light rail & commuter rail projects and ASA commuter rail project
Austin > Possible light rail & commuter rail projects and ASA commuter rail project
El Paso > Possible light rail projects
Rio Grand Valley > Possible light rail & commuter rail projects.

The only means available to support rail & bus projects financially is with sales taxes. I believe it's well documented that many cities have reached the State's cap on sales taxes, very few of them are allocating any for transit. So most cities must decide whether to have a transit or economic development sales tax, few cities actually have both.

If TXDOT was actually funding 100% of all these highway, rail & bus projects around the State, that argument might have a valid point. But TXDOT doesn't, so that argument isn't valid.

[Spjz]

Or we could decide to be men and women, and not parasites, and take care of our own.Lecter, have you ever embraced pragmatism?

[saxman66]

Good questions. The answers are simple. TXDOT doesn't fund anything but highways. TXDOT doesn't fund bus or rail transit agencies. All the highway construction projects going forward into construction in Collin, Dallas, Denton, and Tarrant Counties are not 100% funded by TXDOT. That's why so many of them are 100% Toll Roads (built by the North Texas Tollway Agency) or have Tolled Managed Lanes (Private-Public-Partnerships). If TXDOT was funding them 100% by gas taxes, there wouldn't be a need for tolls set up by local agencies.

The only means available to support rail & bus projects financially is with sales taxes. I believe it's well documented that many cities have reached the State's cap on sales taxes, very few of them are allocating any for transit. So most cities must decide whether to have a transit or economic development sales tax, few cities actually have both.

If TXDOT was actually funding 100% of all these highway, rail & bus projects around the State, that argument might have a valid point. But TXDOT doesn't, so that argument isn't valid.

The good news is that this bill will change that. It actually got passed to the governors desk. The problem is, they didn't give TxDOT any money for it:

http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/Texas-Rail-Advocates/message/402
Texas Senate Bill 1382 was passed by the House today (5/28/09) and will go to
Governor Perry.

Relating to the coordination of the planning, construction, operation, and
maintenance of a statewide passenger rail system by the Texas Department of
Transportation.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Currently, no state entity has a leading role in passenger rail development,
which results in relatively little attention being paid to rail as an option for
addressing some of the state's transportation problems, and the state lacking a
comprehensive examination or plan for the development of a passenger rail
system.
As proposed, S.B. 1382 requires the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT)
to create a long-term plan for a statewide passenger rail system, which is
required to include annual updates on existing and proposed passenger rail
systems, analysis of potential interconnectivity problems, and ridership
projections. The bill requires TxDOT to coordinate the planning, construction,
operation, and maintenance of a statewide passenger rail system and to
coordinate with local entities involved with passenger rail responsibilities

TxDOT wasn't the only agency not receiving a budget. There were 4 others that didn't get any budget for next fiscal year. The way I see it, there is no way around an emergency session. There's no money past September 30th.

[mjblazin]

The commernt about mini-DOTs could have some bearing. The state has an issue where DOT is out of funds. Eventually funds will come from some source. At the same time one of the richest areas in the state wants to go its own way and raise its own funds. If you are paying your own way, you are not interested in paying some else's way. People expecting others to pay their way would get apprehensive. It's the same reason that organizations like DISD restrict the extra funds a neighborhood school can get from outside the system. If allowed, I'm sure Preston Hollow parents could fund a palace for their children out of own funds, creating a private school within the public district, while using political accumen to keep broadbased taxes down.

Other areas of the state could see letting Dallas go its own way has negative downstream impacts.

[Hannibal Lecter]

TXDOT doesn't fund anything but highways. TXDOT doesn't fund bus or rail transit agencies.TxDOT does fund some rural bus service, plus airport improvements, ferries and the occasional white elephant (http://www.woodallrodgerspark.org/).

[electricron]

TxDOT does fund some rural bus service, plus airport improvements, ferries and the occasional white elephant (http://www.woodallrodgerspark.org/).

Per http://www.allbusiness.com/construction/construction-overview/6333981-1.html

The deck park construction costs have been estimated at $60 million to $70 million, to be funded with a combination of public and private money: at least $20 million in private funding, $20 million from the city of Dallas and $20 million in grants.

Per http://blogs.dallasobserver.com/unfairpark/2009/03/woodall_rodgers_park_just_got.php

The vote at the Texas Transportation Committee meeting just came in ... and the Woodall Rodgers Park was just awarded $16.7 million in stimulus funds! This is a significant boost for a landmark project that will have a long-lasting positive impact on the quality of life in Dallas. A full press release will come very shortly! ... The construction workers are literally "shovel ready" completing the infrastructure for the deck park.

Is TXDOT putting more than $3.3 million of their own funds into this project? Must make you fell great to confuse everyone into thinking TXDOT is footing the bill for the entire costs. :2doh:

Must make TXDOT supporters turn red in the face when faced with the facts that private partners, the City of Dallas, and the Federal government are each putting at least 5 times more cash into a park project over a State highway. TXDOT's actual share of the $60 million total project is $3 million, a measly 5%.

[AeroD]

The only means available to support rail & bus projects financially is with sales taxes. I believe it's well documented that many cities have reached the State's cap on sales taxes, very few of them are allocating any for transit. So most cities must decide whether to have a transit or economic development sales tax, few cities actually have both.

Why not use something similar to CDAs to develop these additional rail and transit projects? As far as the politics, I doubt you will have the same xenophobic reaction of letting a company like Cintra or OHL to develop a transit system in a metropolitan area as you would with the same companies developing an expansive tollroad system that cuts up rural Texas.

[Hannibal Lecter]

Is TXDOT putting more than $3.3 million of their own funds into this project? Must make you fell great to confuse everyone into thinking TXDOT is footing the bill for the entire costs. :2doh:

Must make TXDOT supporters turn red in the face when faced with the facts that private partners, the City of Dallas, and the Federal government are each putting at least 5 times more cash into a park project over a State highway. TXDOT's actual share of the $60 million total project is $3 million, a measly 5%.TxDOT promised $20 million to the park over a year ago -- LONG before there was any "stimulus" plan. This was fully covered in the appropriate thread; see http://forum.dallasmetropolis.com/showpost.php?p=289746&postcount=681.

I haven't seen anything that says TxDOT has applied the $16.7M from the federal taxpayers against it's share, or if it it's on top of the $20 million. Either way, that's $20 million that could have been spent on transportation.

Just because you're a little out of the loop, don't assume everyone is....

[electricron]

TxDOT promised $20 million to the park over a year ago -- LONG before there was any "stimulus" plan. This was fully covered in the appropriate thread; see http://forum.dallasmetropolis.com/showpost.php?p=289746&postcount=681.

I haven't seen anything that says TxDOT has applied the $16.7M from the federal taxpayers against it's share, or if it it's on top of the $20 million. Either way, that's $20 million that could have been spent on transportation.

Just because you're a little out of the loop, don't assume everyone is....

Even if TXDOT spent $20 million of their own money on a $60 million project, that only adds up to a third of the total costs. Along every rural freeway there are rest stops and information stops at the border. Who do you think paid for them? TXDOT has been in the business of placing parks near or on freeway property forever. Why doing so near downtown Dallas be any different?

Because you think it is a waste of taxpayer's money isn't a good enough reason.

[Hannibal Lecter]

Even if TXDOT spent $20 million of their own money on a $60 million project, that only adds up to a third of the total costs.By your logic, it would be OK for the government to throw a billion dollars in a hole, as long as other folks were throwing in two billion. (Come to think of it, a lot of politicians seem to think that way. Are you on the Dallas city council?) $20 million is $20 million.


Along every rural freeway there are rest stops and information stops at the border. Who do you think paid for them? TXDOT has been in the business of placing parks near or on freeway property forever. Why doing so near downtown Dallas be any different?Rural rest stops were envisioned as a safety feature. I don't see any safety contribution made by this park. In fact, one of the reasons it has been delayed is that they had to add life-safety features necessitated by the hazard it creates.


Because you think it is a waste of taxpayer's money isn't a good enough reason.Huh? A good enough reason for what?

[Spjz]

By your logic, it would be OK for the government to throw a billion dollars in a hole, as long as other folks were throwing in two billion. (Come to think of it, a lot of politicians seem to think that way. Are you on the Dallas city council?) $20 million is $20 million.

Rural rest stops were envisioned as a safety feature. I don't see any safety contribution made by this park. In fact, one of the reasons it has been delayed is that they had to add life-safety features necessitated by the hazard it creates.

Huh? A good enough reason for what?I completely disagree with Lecter regarding rail funding. We need...Ok, need's a strong word...we really should fund a rail system. Any tax approved by voters is legitimate, even if the method of taxation does not have a strong correlation to the improvement paid for.

However, I'm in complete agreement with Lecter concerning the use of gas tax dollars to fund the Woodall Rogers Park, especially in light of TXDoT's finances. The Woodall Rogers park should be paid for by local GO bond and nothing else.

[AeroD]

Rural rest stops were envisioned as a safety feature.

That and to prevent people from leaving souvenirs along the road.

[msutton]

Can we save arguments on the funding/validity of the Woodall Park for its own thread, and keep this one on topic, please? I'm tired enough of reading the endless back-and-forth of it there, much less on other threads I'm interested in.

[saxman66]

Just heard on NPR this afternoon, Perry will probably call the Texas Legislator back for a session. Hopefully they can set a budget this time for TxDOT and the other agencies. I wonder if there is any chance to get the Local Tax option on the floor too. I've been trying to find articles or links about a recall but can't quite yet.

[electricron]

By your logic, it would be OK for the government to throw a billion dollars in a hole, as long as other folks were throwing in two billion. (Come to think of it, a lot of politicians seem to think that way. Are you on the Dallas city council?) $20 million is $20 million.

That depends on whether you consider a park a hole. I don't.


Rural rest stops were envisioned as a safety feature. I don't see any safety contribution made by this park. In fact, one of the reasons it has been delayed is that they had to add life-safety features necessitated by the hazard it creates.

Why can't a roadside park in an urban environment be a safety feature too? Can't drivers exit, park their vehicles, and relax at this park? You're just as likely to fall asleep in an urban freeway as a rural freeway? Why must all roadside parks funded by TXDOT be in rural areas?

[NThomas]

...Why can't a roadside park in an urban environment be a safety feature too? Can't drivers exit, park their vehicles, and relax at this park? You're just as likely to fall asleep in an urban freeway as a rural freeway? Why must all roadside parks funded by TXDOT be in rural areas?
Because there isn't another option to stop off. La Quinta Inn isen't always were drivers get sleepy.

Edit: I forgot to add these around my 1st version of this post: ... :2doh:

[electricron]

Because there isn't another option to stop off. La Quinta Inn isen't always were drivers get sleepy.
Where is there not another option? :2orbit:
Most small cities and large towns, along interstate highways have motels where one can stop at for sleep. :cigar:

If you think this urban park is wasting highway funds, I'll suggest rural roadside stops are too. :censored:
Does that make you feel better? What's good for the goose is also good for the gander. :thumbsup:

[NThomas]

Where is there not another option? :2orbit:
Most small cities and large towns, along interstate highways have motels where one can stop at for sleep. :cigar: ...
Unless your in the middle of no where. Then a no tell motel is your only choice for miles. (which usually isn't that long)

...If you think this urban park is wasting highway funds, I'll suggest rural roadside stops are too. :censored: ...
Considering the deck park is covering a state highway, I think it's appropriate to spend funds on it. ;) But considering how much growth has happened, but like the renovated rest area in Bell County (http://www.dot.state.tx.us/mnt/sra/srahome.htm?sranbr=5&dir=N), you only have to drive a little longer to find a motel and gas station with the same offerings as the vending machines.

[JCL]

I wonder if there is any chance to get the Local Tax option on the floor too. I've been trying to find articles or links about a recall but can't quite yet.

That's the $60,000 question. Any opinions on this? Is TLOTA dead dead, or can it come back a-la the special session? Can Corona Filibuster the special session until he gets what he wants? All this parliamentary stuff makes my head spin.

[electricron]

Is TLOTA dead dead, or can it come back a-la the special session?
I believe anything can happen in a Special Session.


The state has an issue where DOT is out of funds. Eventually funds will come from some source. At the same time one of the richest areas in the state wants to go its own way and raise its own funds. If you are paying your own way, you are not interested in paying some else's way.

North Texas isn't the only Metro area in Texas wanting Local Option Taxes for Transportation, therefore your point isn't valid. I agree that I would prefer TXDOT fund its fair share of ALL transportation projects, but the fact remains it wasn't authorized to in the past.
I wouldn't have a problem increasing gas taxes statewide to fix TXDOT's funding problems, as long as TXDOT could help fund ALL transportation projects throughout the state. But would that be fair for rural Texans? The Local Option Tax limits areas of increased gas taxes to just urban metros.

[mjblazin]

I could think of many data points that might move my point invalid, but having more than one metro area interested would not be one of them. That fact would exacerbate the fear of a non-metro politician that the big boys were taking their financial blocks and going home.

[AeroD]

I wouldn't have a problem increasing gas taxes statewide to fix TXDOT's funding problems, as long as TXDOT could help fund ALL transportation projects throughout the state. But would that be fair for rural Texans?

Yes. People in rural communities probably use highways more often than urban communities. Whereas in a metro area you can travel via a city street to go to a grocery store or school, in rural areas you may have to drive on 50 miles of a state highway to get to a Wal-Mart.

The products that rural communities sell to get to distribution centers and eventually urban areas, are shipped on highways.

A gas tax is a user fee, and perhaps the "fairest" form of paying for transportation infrastructure.

[Hannibal Lecter]

I believe anything can happen in a Special Session.In Texas, a special session can only consider those subjects specified by the governor when calling the session

[electricron]

In Texas, a special session can only consider those subjects specified by the governor when calling the session

And I assume TXDOT fundiing is amongst them. Don't forget, the Local Option Tax was included in the Senate's TXDOT funding bill.

[AeroD]

Sunset bill, not funding bill. TXDOT funds are in the appropriations bill.

And the special will be more than likely to pass the Sunset Safety Net bill rather than actual sunset bills.

[electricron]

Sunset bill, not funding bill. TXDOT funds are in the appropriations bill.

And the special will be more than likely to pass the Sunset Safety Net bill rather than actual sunset bills.

True! But it is possible the Legislature could pass a brand new sunset bill for TXDOT if the leadership of either house demanded it and refused to just pass a safety net bill.

[AeroD]

True! But it is possible the Legislature could pass a brand new sunset bill for TXDOT if the leadership of either house demanded it and refused to just pass a safety net bill.

No. The Governor wants a special session that is as short and sweet as possible. With both chambers in disagreement on the TxDOT Sunset bill, I doubt passing a sunset bill will be short and sweet.

[electricron]

No. The Governor wants a special session that is as short and sweet as possible. With both chambers in disagreement on the TxDOT Sunset bill, I doubt passing a sunset bill will be short and sweet.

I'll agree, that will be what the Governor wants. But is that what the Senate and House wants?
75% of the Senate voted for the Local Option Tax, the House never actually voted on the Local Option Tax.
If one house refused to compromised over this issue, they could tie the special session up for a long time, and cause a second, third, fourth, etc special session. It really depends upon the leadership of both houses.

[mjblazin]

The House does not want it. It's that simple. It's a myth that cause of failure was simply the wrong appointees to the conference committee. The legislature is interested in settling business, not finding reasons to drag out the process. In lieu of some demanding legal requirement to force action, Local Option is exactly the wrong topic for a special session. The proponents need to spend time understanding the root of the opposition (no, it's just Neanderthal anti-tax feeling) and craft some solutions.

[NThomas]

The House does not want it. It's that simple. It's a myth that cause of failure was simply the wrong appointees to the conference committee. The legislature is interested in settling business, not finding reasons to drag out the process. In lieu of some demanding legal requirement to force action, Local Option is exactly the wrong topic for a special session. The proponents need to spend time understanding the root of the opposition (no, it's just Neanderthal anti-tax feeling) and craft some solutions.
^ That was your 1,000th post!

[AeroD]

The other potential problem is that, let's assume TLOTA passes the Legislature, voters reject a gas tax increase. That could hamstring state funding for transportation. What North Texas lawmaker would want to "index" the state fuel tax after seeing their constituents reject a local fuel tax increase? Then TXDOT's hands would really be tied.

[electricron]

Then, what tax would you prefer we use to build the new transit and highway projects in North Texas?
So far, we have seen only NOs from the State Legislature.
No to a local sales tax increase. (2005 and 2007)
No to a local gas tax increase. (2009)
No to a local new auto registration fee. (2009)
No to a local driver's license tax fee. (2009)
No to a local vehicle emissions fee. (2009)
No to local parking fees. (2009) (Only Dart got this potential fee in 2009)(Why the rest of the Metroplex was denied this tax is beyond me?)

I'm sorry, we're quickly running out of local taxes that local cities or counties could charge to help financially support local transit agencies or local highway projects. What's left?

[JCL]

Any news on the summer session and transportation funding?

[electricron]

Any news on the summer session and transportation funding?

All the Legislature passed was the Safety Net authorizations for the three Departments.
Which means another 2 years will pass before anything positive, as far as TXDOT and Rail is concerned, is done.

What tax is left that our local metroplex leaders could tax for local transportation projects?

Only up to the 1% sales tax is left. Whose limitations have prevented other cities from joining DART and FWTA for so long now it's laughable. :Banana09:

[mjblazin]

We are not going to get around the legislature on this one. We need to spend the next two years identifying the root causes of the opposition and addressing those points with the individuals concerned. Broadsides from the DMN and ad hominem comments won't cut it. Blocking & tackling, one yard at a time, one person at a time, something about which I get the impression our delegation knows next to nothing, is what it will take.

Who are the opponents, what are their key points, and what are our points of leverage? We are not going to change anyone's minds with "why don't you get it" complaints. I may have missed it, but I have yet to see a down in the weeds review in the DMN.

[electricron]

Who are the opponents, what are their key points, and what are our points of leverage?

All anti-taxers were/are the opponents. They never met a tax that they ever liked. I take that back, they will support user taxes as long as the user isn't them. They are the same people against toll roads whether they financed by local toll agencies or foreign banks! They insist they want more roads and transit in general, yet don't want to pay for them.

When not every legislature in the area isn't behind the tax plan, and there were legislators in the area against this one, a local area tax proposal is going to crash into burning embers. Hopefully, at the next legislature, the two-faced politicians will lose. If not, North Central Texas will never put up an united front.

[mjblazin]

It sounds like the first step is to work on local legislators then, not going forward until we get everyone onboard.

[tamtagon]

It sounds like the first step is to work on local legislators then, not going forward until we get everyone onboard.

I think so, too. We may have already observed a coalition emerge among local legislators capable of acknowledging which issues are important for the entire region, and which of these issues will require a unified political front during the State legislative processes.

Certainly this latest excursion in politics has shown current local legislators what they're up against and hinted at the real political muscle of North Texas waiting to get exercised on a truly good plan. This was a practice session for North Texas representatives to get statewide approval of an intra-county transportation revenue generation device. Gigantic in population and very large in geography, Harris County has enjoyed the ability to get some amazing highways built in the Houston area. Should State reps from Dallas, Tarrant, Collin and Denton counties approach State politics with a true community approach, there is every reason to expect a regionally oriented & sourced revenue device will be approved to facilitate the rapid construction of higher capacity passenger rail service to satisfy the increasing transportation needs along existing North Texas highway corridors.