tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-83038118409438064962023-11-15T09:01:56.179-08:00Waller County Sub-Regional Planning CommissionWaller County SRPChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18322641167334940793noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8303811840943806496.post-89871204043192521202009-04-16T18:13:00.000-07:002009-04-16T17:39:34.983-07:00<div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(102, 0, 0);">The WCSRPC meets regularly at 7 p.m. on the first Monday of every month at the Road and Bridge complex in Hempstead.<br /><br />Meetings are open to the public.<br /><br /><br /></span></span></div>Waller County SRPChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18322641167334940793noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8303811840943806496.post-84791687104302121492009-04-15T17:32:00.000-07:002009-04-16T17:39:18.279-07:00<div style="text-align: left;"><span style="color: rgb(102, 0, 0);font-size:180%;" ><span style="font-weight: bold;">EMINENT DOMAIN </span></span><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 0, 0);font-size:130%;" ><span style="font-weight: bold;">ANARCHY vs. COMMON SENSE </span></span><br /></div><br />4/15/09<br /><br />By: Trey Duhon and Don Garrett<br />Citizens for a Better Waller County<br />Copyright 2009<br /><br />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.”<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(204, 0, 0);">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”.</span><br /><br />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.<span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(204, 0, 0);"> 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.</span><br /><br />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.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(204, 0, 0);">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.”</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(204, 0, 0);">Sadly, Justice O’Connor was correct. </span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">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. </span><br /><br />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.<br /><br />Since Kelo, 42 states have enacted legislation to restrict the use of eminent domain for economic development. The Texas legislature quickly responded by passing <span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(204, 0, 0);">Senate Bill 7.<br /><br />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.</span> <span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(204, 0, 0);">Lastly, SB 7 did nothing to correct past problems with Texas eminent domain law.</span><br /><br />What kind of problems were there with Texas eminent domain law?<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(153, 0, 0);">Believe it or not, the attack on private property rights in Texas actually began long before the Kelo case. <span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">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.</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(153, 0, 0);">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. <span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">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.</span></span> <span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(153, 0, 0);"><span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">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).</span> 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. </span> <span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 0, 0);"><br /><br />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.</span><br /><br />As the Texas Public Policy Foundation determined,<span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(204, 0, 0);"> “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.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">Unfortunately, there was one person who disagreed – Governor Rick Perry, who vetoed HB 2006 without giving the Legislature an opportunity to override the veto.</span> <span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">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.</span><br /><br />Where do we go from here?<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">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.</span><br /><br />In the event of a gubernatorial veto, the Texas legislature must be prepared to immediately override it. <span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(204, 0, 0);">It is also vital that the Legislature and Texans pass a constitutional amendment </span>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.<br /><br />What is interesting is that<span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(204, 0, 0);"> Gov. Perry</span>, who will be running for re-election next year and will likely face a strong challenge from Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson,<span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(204, 0, 0);"> has suddenly come to the realization </span>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.<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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. <span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(204, 0, 0);">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.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(204, 0, 0);">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.</span><br /><br />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. <span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(204, 0, 0);">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? </span><br /><br />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.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(204, 0, 0);">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. </span>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.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(204, 0, 0);">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. </span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(204, 0, 0);">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</span>. Excessive noises, pollution, congestion, and restricted access due to traffic patterns are examples that contribute to economic obsolescence.<span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(204, 0, 0);"> 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”. </span>The difference in value is the loss attributed to this type of obsolescence.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">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. </span><br /><br />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,<span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 153, 0);"> <span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">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). </span></span><br /><br />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. <span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(204, 0, 0);">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. </span><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">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. </span> <span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(204, 0, 0);">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</span>. We must now decide if we will allow anarchy and tyranny to commence.<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic; color: rgb(0, 0, 153);"><span style="font-weight: bold;">About the authors </span><br /><br /></span><span style="font-style: italic; color: rgb(0, 0, 153);"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Carbett “Trey” J. Duhon III </span><br />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.</span> <span style="font-style: italic; color: rgb(0, 0, 153);"><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Don M. Garrett </span><br />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.</span><br /><br />© 2008 Citizens for a Better Waller County, P. O. Box 1802 Waller, TX. 77484: <a href="http://www.wallercountycitizens.org/">www.wallercountycitizens.org</a>Waller County SRPChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18322641167334940793noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8303811840943806496.post-42642928957594503452009-02-12T05:31:00.000-08:002009-02-14T05:39:16.485-08:00<span style="color: rgb(102, 0, 0);font-size:180%;" ><span style="font-weight: bold;">TxDOT agrees to work with county group on project</span></span><br /><br />Waller County News-Citizen<br /><br />WALLER – <span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(204, 0, 0);">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.</span><br /><br />“We welcome the opportunity to work with your group on transportation issues that are important to Waller County citizens,” Saenz stated in his letter.<br /><br />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.<br /><br />“This is a significant step in the process for Waller County citizens and the WCSRPC,” stated Maurice Hart Jr., president of the WCSRPC.<br /><br />“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.<br /><br />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.”<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(204, 0, 0);">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.”</span><br /><br />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.<br /><br />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. <span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(204, 0, 0);">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.”</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(204, 0, 0);">The Commission also voted to extend an invitation to Katy ISD to join the WCSRPC.</span><br /><br />The WCSRPC is also looking at zip codes issues in Prairie View and Pattison, in addition to drainage issues in Waller County.<br /><br />For additional information and updates on the WCSRPC, you can visit their website at <a href="http://wallercountysrpc.blogspot.com./">http://wallercountysrpc.blogspot.com.</a> 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.<br /><br />Meetings of the WSRPC are open to the public.<br /><br />© 2008 Waller County News-Citizen : <a href="http://www.hcnonline.com/articles/2009/02/14/waller_county_news_citizen/news/wcsrpc021209.txt">www.hcnonline.com</a>Waller County SRPChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18322641167334940793noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8303811840943806496.post-28927284557375555352008-12-09T13:24:00.000-08:002008-12-13T13:25:06.122-08:00<span style="font-size: 180%; color: rgb(102, 0, 0);"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Katy will mull joining sub-regional planning group</span></span><br /><br />By AUDREY M. MARKS<br />The Katy Sun<br />Copyright 2008<br /><br />The city of Katy will wait before they make a decision to join the Waller County Sub-Regional Planning Commission.<br /><br />The commission was formed to fight against the Trans-Texas Corridor, in it's original representation that would cut through rural areas of the greater Houston region. Even though most rural areas appear safe, the sub-regional planning commission exists to help coordinate projects across all levels of government.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(204, 0, 0);">“The purpose [of the commission] requires state and federal officials to coordinate activities that effect local communities,” Don Garrett, a member of the commission, said.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(204, 0, 0);">Texas created laws in 1965 and 2001 to help strengthen local communities and empower them to have a say in projects funded by the state and federal government.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(204, 0, 0);">While the Texas Department of Transportation said in June it would explore highways that already existed to create the Trans-Texas Corridor, Garrett said “Waller is not off the map.”</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(204, 0, 0);">Garrett said if Katy joined they would be able to find out state and federal projects being planned that would impact the community. <span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">There is no cost to join the sub-regional planning commission.</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">The commission is a “protective and coordinating mechanism so we are not left out in the process,” Garrett said. It's “very worthwhile.”</span><br /><br />City council voted Monday to wait until their January meeting to make a final decision on joining the planning commission.<br /><br />© 2008 The Katy Sun: <a href="http://www.hcnonline.com/articles/2008/12/10/katy_sun/news/sws-_katy_planning_commission.txt">www.hcnonline.com</a>Waller County SRPChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18322641167334940793noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8303811840943806496.post-32518015667100095252008-11-21T09:55:00.000-08:002008-11-26T21:34:14.722-08:00<div style="text-align: center; color: rgb(102, 0, 0);"><span style="font-size:180%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;"> NOTICE OF MEETING</span></span><br /></div><br /><div style="text-align: center; color: rgb(102, 0, 0);"><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Waller County Sub-Regional Planning Commission </span></span><br /></div><div style="text-align: center; color: rgb(102, 0, 0);"><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">of Waller County, Texas</span></span><br /></div><br /><div style="text-align: center; color: rgb(153, 0, 0);"><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Monday, December 1, 2008</span></span><br /></div><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(153, 0, 0);font-size:130%;" >7:00 P.M.</span><br /></div><br />Notice is hereby given that the WALLER COUNTY SUB-REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION (“WCSRPC”) of Waller County, Texas, will meet at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, the 1st day of December 2008, at the Pine Island Baptist Church, 36573 Brumlow Road, Hempstead, Texas 77445.<br /><br />Said meeting will be a regular meeting for the purpose of transacting the routine business of the WCSRPC and to consider and take possible action on any of the following agenda items:<br /><br />Delivery of Invocation<br /><br />1. Approval of the Agenda<br /><br />2. Approval of the Oct. meeting minutes.<br /><br />3. Discuss status of Invitation and responses from WISD, RISD, & HISD, City of Katy, Bluebonnet Water District, and Katy Brookshire Drainage District.<br /><br />4. Discuss status of remaining invitations to City of Brookshire and the City of Hempstead and proceed to take action recommended by the board.<br /><br />5. Discuss extending an Invitation to the Katy I.S.D. and proceed to take action recommended by the board.<br /><br />6. Discuss the information obtained from the American Land Foundation Conference in Austin. Go over highlights and area of focus in the booklets supplied to the directors.<br /><br />7. Update and discussion on the zip-code issue with the cities of Pattison and Prairie View. Discuss communications between various County Departments and steps to educate and encourage them to communicate, cooperate, and coordinate with the WCSRPC. Discuss the communications between the County Engineer and the USP pertaining to the Zip-Code matters of Pattison and the need to “Coordinate” and proceed to take action recommended by the board.<br /><br />8. Update on the Texas Dept. of Transportation and any response to our request for coordination. Discuss plans in preparation of that future meeting and proceed to take action recommended by the board.<br /><br />9. Discuss status of sending a copy of TxDOT’s notification documentation to the Houston Galveston Area Counsel (HGAC) and other pertinent parties affected by the E.I.S. process and proceed to take action recommended by the board.<br /><br />10. Any other new business to come before the board.<br /><br />PUBLIC COMMENT<br /><br />ADJOURN MEETINGWaller County SRPChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18322641167334940793noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8303811840943806496.post-44928687502883430982008-11-20T07:38:00.000-08:002008-11-23T07:39:04.555-08:00<span style="font-size: 180%; color: rgb(102, 0, 0);"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Council discusses TTC path</span></span><br /><br />ROBIN McDONALD<br />Waller County News-Citizen<br />Copyright 2008<br /><br />WALLER COUNTY - Mayor Pro-Tem Maurice Hart discussed the continued possibility of the Trans-Texas Corridor cutting a path through Waller County at the Waller City Council meeting on Monday Night, November 17.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(153, 0, 0);">Hart is a member of the Waller County Sub-Regional Planning Commission (WCSRPC), which was organized as a tool to fight the Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC) proposed Interstate 69.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(153, 0, 0);">The Texas Department of Transportation (TXDOT) is working on an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), which will provide information on how the TTC might affect Waller County, among other areas. <span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">Hart said while it appeared for a time that TXDOT would stop looking at Waller County as a location for the TTC, that apparently is not the case, because Waller County is still in the EIS.</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(153, 0, 0);">Hart noted that the commission was sending a letter to Texas Department of Transportation “to put them on notice that they have to coordinate with us.”</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(153, 0, 0);">Hart also shared that members discussed inviting other municipalities to join the Commission, including <span style="color: rgb(204, 0, 0);">Hempstead, Pattison, Brookshire, and the Farm Bureau.</span> Hart also stated that some citizens may be invited to join as non-voting members.</span><br /><br />Police Chief James Fulton introduced two members of his force at the -- Officer Anthony Scopel and returning Officer Chris McClure.<br /><br />“We honor our veterans of foreign wars in November,” he stated. “But we often forget about the battle we fight here at home ... that is, fighting crime.<br /><br />“It takes a select person to come into a community such as ours and put their lives on the line for us,” Fulton said, with much applause from the audience.<br /><br />Waller Economic Development Corporation Director John Isom and Mayor Paul Wood also discussed future city plans and meetings they have attended over the past few weeks.<br /><br />Isom discussed an upcoming feasibility study that will look at using the railways for commuting, and setting up an area in Waller as a regional water detention area. Mayor Wood discussed a tri-county meeting, in which Highway 290 improvements were listed as a high priority item in both Harris and Waller counties.<br /><br />Waller Council then approved the Police Department’s “In-Car Camera Operation” Policy Number P-1, approved advertising for bids for the 12” water main extension along Stokes Road, approved the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Waller as presented by GrantWorks, Inc., and approved changes in vacation benefits for city employees.<br /><br />© 2008 Waller County News-Citizen: <a href="http://www.hcnonline.com/articles/2008/11/22/waller_county_news_citizen/news/doc4925a013dfb8f660360246.txt">www.hcnonline.com</a>Waller County SRPChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18322641167334940793noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8303811840943806496.post-44366774135196726902008-08-28T20:26:00.000-07:002008-10-29T20:28:06.737-07:00<span style="color: rgb(102, 0, 0); font-size: 180%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Waller City Council discusses city issues at monthly meeting</span></span><br /><br />Waller County News-Citizen<br />Copyright 2008<br /><br />WALLER - Waller City councilman Maurice Hart gave an update to the Waller County Sub-Regional Planning Commission at the council meeting on Monday night, August 18.<br /><br />The commission was originally set up as a tool to fight the Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC) proposed Interstate 69. Hart noted that in the last meeting, members elected officers and discussed future plans, beyond the TTC.<br /><br />"We decided to get other cities within the county to join the commission," Hart said. Some of the cities the commission approached included Pattison, Brookshire, and Katy.<br /><br />While Pattison and Brookshire have tentatively agreed to join, there is hope that Katy will join as well.<br /><br />Hart noted there are other issues the commission can discuss besides the TTC, particularly the drainage concern in the area.<br /><br />"It looks like it [TTC] is going to bypass us, but it still might affect us," Hart explained.<br /><br />"And we have [drainage] issues in the city, but we need to address those elsewhere," he added. "What can the commission do to help with the downstream water flow? Something has to be done beyond Waller.<br /><br />"We can open up the drains outside of town, but until we can get the water somewhere, we will flood somebody else out."<br /><br />© 2008 Waller County News-Citizen:<a href="http://www.hcnonline.com/articles/2008/08/28/waller_county_news_citizen/news/doc48b6c7e55520a633367648.txt">www.hcnonline.com</a>Waller County SRPChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18322641167334940793noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8303811840943806496.post-20411440395773418682008-07-10T20:28:00.000-07:002008-10-29T20:29:09.712-07:00<span style="color: rgb(102, 0, 0); font-size: 180%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Local Republicans Invite 391 Commission Speakers</span></span><br /><br />BY JOYCE FLOYD,<br />The Navasota Examiner<br />Copyright 2008<br /><br />The regular meeting of the Grimes County Republican Party held Monday, July 7, at 7 p.m. in the commissioners’ courtroom in Anderson featured a slightly different agenda and group in attendance.<br /><br />This meeting was open to all concerned citizens, regardless of political affiliation, to gather information regarding the formation of a 391 sub-regional commission in Grimes County.<br /><br />Special guests were Commissioner Glenn Beckendorff of Waller County, who is also an officer of the Waller County sub-regional planning commission and a director of the Houston- Galveston Area Council (COG); Trey Duhon, an attorney from Waller County, as well as a director for the Waller County Toll Road Authority and a director of the TTC/I-69 Advisory Committee; and Don Garrett, long time Waller County realtor and president of the Citizens for a Better Waller County Organization. Each spoke, then answered questions for the 35-plus people assembled Monday evening.<br /><br />Grimes County officials attending were Judge Betty Shiflett, District Attorney Tuck McLain and councilman Norman from the newly-formed City of Iola.<br /><br />Duhon presented an overview of a 391 sub-regional planning commission, explaining the state statutes authorizing the formation and authorities awarded the commission under those statutes.<br /><br />He allayed the fears of some that a 391 might have the authority of eminent domain by citing Texas statutes as well as assuring listeners that for extra measure, special verbiage could be included in the commission by-laws to exclude any and all condemnation authority.<br /><br />Another negative brought before the Iola City Council in a recent meeting was the threat of a lawsuit. Duhon again countered with an explanation of the commission’s authority, which in general is to coordinate with State Agencies. “How can someone get sued for coordinating?” he asked.<br /><br />Beckendorff assured the group that forming a 391 sub-regional was not an obstructionist movement but a full-fledged effort to bring their county together to work toward common goals and improvements for the cities individually as well as the county as a whole. He cited a working example.<br /><br />Several months ago, TxDOT proposed a road widening. The school district and bus drivers were concerned with the plan as presented because they felt it put the drivers and children at risk.<br /><br />After contacting TxDOT and explaining their 391 commission was in progress, meetings were facilitated and the schedule and plans for the project were adjusted to meet the needs and safety concerns of the school district.<br /><br />After a general question and answer session, Judge Shiflett spoke to the group. She reported on her recent visit with TxDOT and stated that TxDOT welcomed the formation of a 391 sub-regional planning commission.<br /><br />She added that the Commisisoners Court still needs more information before making a decision on the matter.<br /><br />© 2008, The Navasota Examiner: <a href="http://www.navasotaexaminer.com/articles/2008/07/08/news/news06.txt">www.navasotaexaminer.com</a>Waller County SRPChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18322641167334940793noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8303811840943806496.post-51922228856994126892008-05-14T20:29:00.000-07:002008-10-29T20:30:19.085-07:00<span style="color: rgb(102, 0, 0); font-size: 180%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">County to explore possible creation of 391 Commission</span></span><br /><br />BY DAVE KUCIFER<br />The Navasota Examner<br />Copyright 2008<br /><br />After listening to presentations by three lawyers familiar with the creation of a Sub-Regional Planning Commission (SRPC), then having questions answered during a 391 workshop last Thursday, Grimes County Commissioners decided to place the item on their May 26 agenda as a discussion item.<br /><br />The workshop at the Navasota center drew a large crowd of area property owners, along with officials from Madison, Waller and Walker counties. Anderson, Bedias and Navasota city officials were also in attendance.<br /><br />Those attending the meeting heard Fred Grant, President of Stewards of the Range and an attorney with over 30 years experience as a planning and zoning officer in Idaho, explain how local government and citizens banded together through a SRPC to protect private land and grazing rights.<br /><br />Dan Bayfield an attorney and President of the American Land Foundation in Taylor followed Grant. Bayfield presented a comprehensive step-by-step outline on forming a SRPC.<br /><br />Trey Duhon, a Waller attorney instrumental in the formation of the Waller County SRPC shared his views regarding a commission in Grimes County.<br /><br />Focal point of the meeting was how local citizens and governments can protect private property from “high-handed” governmental take overs such as the action proposed by TXDOT’s I69/TTC plans.<br />*<br /><br />Those involved with the possible formation of a 391 commission said they could do nothing without governmental action. “It will take the county plus one or more city to get the commission formed.”<br /><br />Once formed, the commission would have governmental and non-governmental members.<br /><br />County Judge Betty Shiflett said Monday that commissioners want to study the information and have an open discussion before committing to any action regarding the formation of a 391 SRPC.<br /><br />© 2008 The Navasota Examiner:<blogitemurl><a href="http://www.navasotaexaminer.com/articles/2008/05/14/news/news05.txt">www.navasotaexaminer.com</a><br /><br /></blogitemurl>Waller County SRPChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18322641167334940793noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8303811840943806496.post-38560898902273823512008-04-17T20:31:00.000-07:002008-10-29T20:32:00.290-07:00<span style="color: rgb(102, 0, 0); font-size: 180%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Waller Council forms group to fight TTC</span></span><br /><br />By:Robin McDonald<br />Waller County News-Citizen<br />Copyright 2008<br /><br />WALLER - Waller City Council passed a resolution approving the formation of a Waller County Sub-Regional Planning Commission as a tool to fight the Trans-Texas Corridor proposed Interstate 69.<br /><br />The Texas Department of Transportation is presently working on the draft Environmental Impact Statement, which will provide information on how the TTC might affect Waller County, among other areas.<br /><br />In February, the city came out in opposition to the encroachment of the TTC, through the city limits and extra-territorial jurisdiction.<br /><br />According to the Citizens for a Better Waller County web site, the TTC-69 project is a high priority corridor for the Trans Texas Corridor. It is planned to be approximately 600 miles long, running from the Texas/Mexico border to northeast Texas, roughly following U.S. Highway 59. Waller and Grimes Counties are in the current study area.<br /><br />With the WCSRPC, Waller can join with other municipality and county planning commissions to request that TxDOT disclose their environmental impact studies on the area. TxDOT is required by law to coordinate with Regional Planning Committees, and may not ignore them, in accordince with the authority granted in Chapter 391 of the Texas Local Government Code.<br /><br />Members from the Citizens for a Better Waller County were present at the meeting, including President Don Garrett, Vice President Trey Duhon, and directors Bill Herman Michelle Sorenson.<br /><br />Garrett spoke, and noted that Chapter 391 is a "very important piece of legislation" holding TxDOT accountable, while it attempts to push the corridor, in some cases over 1200 feet wide with few on and off ramps, through rural counties without scrutinizing the environmental impact.<br /><br />"Having this committee empowers you," Garrett noted, "and they have to coordinate with you.<br /><br />"This gives notice to TXDOT that if I-69 comes through Waller County, they are put on notice," Garret said, explaining if TXDOT were to ignore the requests of the commission, the city, along with other communities in the area, could file litigation against the Department of Transportation to ensure they comply with the law. Other surrounding counties have done this in the past, after TxDOT ignored their requests.<br /><br />Council woman Nancy Arnold noted, "This shows that grassroots activities can make an impact."<br /><br />Councilman Maurice Hart agreed, saying, "We need to have a voice in this. There are no people more qualified to determine what the needs and wants are in Waller County, than the people here in Waller County," he concluded.<br /><br />Director Troy Duhon said, "it's imperative that we do this sooner rather than later," explaining that Governor Rick Perry, in his zeal to push the TTC through, may try to have a special session and try to change the law so that Chapter 391 no longer exists or wields power through grassroots organizations.<br /><br />© 2008 Community Newspapers Online: <blogitemurl><a href="http://www.hcnonline.com/site/index.cfm?newsid=19493405&BRD=1574&PAG=461&dept_id=532207&rfi=8">www.hcnonline.com</a></blogitemurl>Waller County SRPChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18322641167334940793noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8303811840943806496.post-44090812229694896492008-04-17T20:30:00.000-07:002008-10-29T20:31:10.520-07:00<span style="color: rgb(102, 0, 0); font-size: 180%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">SRPC to allow input on TTC</span></span><br /><br />By: Chantel E. Gage<br />Waller County News Citizen<br />Copyright 2008<br /><br />HEMPSTEAD - The Waller County Commissioners' Court approved a resolution authorizing the formation of a Waller County Sub-Regional Planning Commission, during Tuesday's meeting at the county courthouse.<br /><br />"A Sub-Regional Planning Commission is a commission made up a group of people who must be members of the Houston-Galveston Area Council for Region 16," said Trey Duhon, vice president of Citizens for a Better Waller County.<br /><br />The SRPC is being created under Chapter 391 under the Texas local government code. The code allows cities to form a planning commission that gives local governments the ability to have interlocal coordination when it comes to private property and land. This includes state agencies such as the Texas Department of Transportation.<br /><br />"The main reason why this commission is being created is because of the TransTexas Corridor. This will give us the ability to have input on how it is going to be done," Duhon said.<br /><br />"TxDOT would be forced to give full disclosure of finances, contracts, and environmental reports on the TTC."<br /><br />The TTC is a corridor that would basically stretch along U.S. Highway 59 from Texarkana/Shreveport, La. to Laredo and U.S. Highway 77 as well as U.S. Highway 281 in South Texas.<br /><br />In some instances the corridor runs straight through Waller County citizen's property.<br /><br />According from TxDOT, the governmental body is trying to create the corridor in order to facilitate and control the movement of people and goods in and through the state, providing economic enhancement, and addressing transportation needs for the next 20 to 50 years.<br /><br />"The reason why we went straight to the city of Waller and Waller County is because of time. We are concerned that the government might change the law to restrict the authority that the Sub-Regional Planning Commission has," said Don Garrett, president of Citizens for a Better Waller County.<br /><br />The requirements to create a SRPC are "a minimum of two cities or one city and one county, and once created, other entities can join," said Duhon.<br /><br />Since the SRPC has been approved by the commissioners, Garrett and Duhon plan to ask other cities and local government entities to join the SRPC so that they can have direct input into state transportation projects which impact their jurisdiction.<br /><br />© 2008 Community Newspapers Online: <blogitemurl><a href="http://www.hcnonline.com/site/index.cfm?newsid=19493058&BRD=1574&PAG=461&dept_id=532207&rfi=8">www.hcnonline.com</a></blogitemurl>Waller County SRPChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18322641167334940793noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8303811840943806496.post-61231135796941481792007-09-08T20:32:00.000-07:002008-10-29T20:33:24.472-07:00<span style="color: rgb(102, 0, 0); font-size: 180%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">TxDOT under fire</span></span><br /><br />By JOANN LIVINGSTON<br />Waxahachie Daily Light<br />Copyright 2007<br /><br />Transportation was a hot subject during the recent legislative session - and it continues to be so in the interim.<br /><br />This week, several Texas lawmakers, Bexar County Commissioner Tommy Adkisson and state Reps. Joe Farias, David Leibowitz, Nathan Macias and others held a press conference in San Antonio in protest against current transportation policy and the Texas Department of Transportation.<br /><br />Key among their concerns are recent reports the state agency has launched a public relations plan to promote the Trans-Texas Corridor and to lobby for toll roads. Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom founder Terri Hall is among those criticizing TxDOT for using tax dollars to promote the TTC and tolling.<br /><br />During the San Antonio press conference, the group also called for TxDOT to install the original gas tax-funded improvement plan for U.S. Highway 281 and drop plans to convert that roadway into a toll road, with Hall saying citizens on hand called for the “immediate resignations of TxDOT leadership.”<br /><br />Hall said TxDOT intends to make some interstates into toll corridors, including Interstate 35 between San Antonio and Dallas and Interstate 10 between Houston and San Antonio and also is looking at highways 281, 1604, Bandera Road and others around San Antonio.<br /><br />“If TxDOT and the politicians who enable them have their way, it won’t stop there,” she said, saying, “TxDOT plans to take every single lane on existing highway U.S. 281 and convert them into toll lanes. The only free lanes will be frontage roads, not highway lanes.”<br /><br />According to www.keeptexasmoving.com, TxDOT’s Web site relating to toll roads, Texas’ population has increased 57 percent in the past 25 years, with road use up by 95 percent.<br />That’s a problem, the agency said, when state road capacity grew only 8 percent. TxDOT further notes on its Web site that the state’s population is estimated to increase another 64 percent during the next 25 years, with road use to increase 214 percent.<br /><br />“Without new funding methods, state road capacity will only grow 6 percent,” the agency says on its Web site.<br /><br />According to a TURF press release, Adkisson, who sits on the San Antonio Metropolitian Planning Organization, said, “TxDOT should begin (improving its relations with the public) by installing the overpasses and improvements at an estimated cost of $100 million and already paid for by our gas taxes instead building the hugely intrusive $400 million toll plan for U.S. 281 at four times the cost (and double the number of lanes).”<br /><br />Adkisson said the state’s transportation policy has failed in several areas by not indexing the gas tax and by not accelerating other forms of transportation. Creative solutions such as contraflow should be implemented and Texas should cease being a donor state that gives away more of its gas taxes than is returned, he said, saying the state is bearing the burden of NAFTA-related traffic.<br /><br />Macias, Farias and Leibowitz discussed their work during the legislative session relating to control over the toll road and TTC issues - and how that work was subsequently altered. All three encouraged voters to seek accountability at the ballot box in the next election so as to affect needed changes.<br /><br />During the press conference, Macias characterized tolling of an existing highway as the same as double taxation - and questioned TxDOT’s cost escalations for certain projects.<br /><br />Farias said amendments he tried to put into the two-year private toll moratorium bill, Senate Bill 792, were stripped out, adding that he’s concerned with the economic impact of tolls on economically-disadvantaged constituents.<br /><br />Leibowitz, who also sits on the San Antonio MPO, said he is calling for that board to pass a resolution against TxDOT’s public relations campaign and said he will ask state Attorney General Greg Abbott for an opinion on the issue.<br /><br />“I have never voted for a single toll road bill in my time in the Texas House,” said Leibowitz, who also shared his concerns that Texas is paying a disproportionate share of the NAFTA cost.<br />Hall noted more lawmakers are becoming involved with the transportation issues.<br /><br />“The citizens support lawmakers’ efforts to put accountability and sanity back into transportation policy,” Hall said. “With U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison introducing a bill to prevent the tolling of existing interstates this week, calls from U.S. Congressman Ciro Rodriguez to investigate the tolling of existing interstates report, and U.S. Sen. John Cornyn and U.S. Congressman Charlie Gonzales adamantly opposed to it, the people may get relief on the federal level first.”<br /><br />Hall said she supports a move back to the gas tax-funded plan for improvements to 281 and a stop to the tolling of other existing highways.<br /><br />“TxDOT has breached the public trust and it cannot be repaired short of cleaning house at that agency. They’ve repeatedly sworn to our faces they’re not tolling existing roads and then lobbied Congress to do just that,” Hall said.<br /><br />TURF calls for investigation<br /><br />In another development this week, TURF has called for Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle to investigate the Texas Department of Transportation relating to a public relations campaign it is mounting.<br /><br />“Unaccountable, eminent domain abusing, runaway toll roads and the Trans-Texas Corridor,” TURF founder Terri Hall said. “It’s not just smarmy, it’s illegal.”<br /><br />In a recent press release, TURF criticizes the agency for disregarding input from Texans, including more than 13,000 people who spoke during hearings on the TTC.<br /><br />“Apparently they lack the intellectual capacity to understand one of the most basic words in the English language (‘no’),” the release reads, with Hall adding, “To add insult to injury, they patronize us further by thinking we just haven’t gotten the message or that we somehow don’t understand their cash-cow, land-grabbing, double-taxing toll road policies, therefore they need to spend our money to further indoctrinate us into submission.”<br /><br />TURF’s disagrees with TxDOT’s plans to spend up to $9 million on its public relations campaign - which started June 1 - to promote the TTC.<br /><br />“The politicians who are ramming this down our throats need to realize they can’t escape the long arm of the law, especially Ronnie Earle’s. Tom Delay couldn’t and neither will they,” Hall said.<br /><br />“The citizens of Texas believe the Texas Department of Transportation is illegally using taxpayer money to wage a cleverly cloaked public relations campaign to push the wildly controversial Trans-Texas Corridor and toll road proliferation,” the complaint reads as filed by TURF, which notes the agency’s public relations campaign includes direct mail, billboards and employee training.<br /><br />“It’s not only an inappropriate and wasteful use of our gas tax dollars by an agency perpetually claiming it’s out of money for roads, but it’s illegal for a public agency to take a policy position and use the public’s tax money to sell them something using an under-handed PR campaign,” the complaint reads.<br /><br />TURF’s complaint also notes that a state auditor’s report issued earlier this year found “mismarking” of funds on expenditures relating to the TTC, with some expenditures marked as engineering instead of as an actual expense of public relations.<br /><br />“Please open an investigation and prosecute this agency for its repeated illegal activities,” the TURF complaint reads. “The people of Texas want justice. When Ken Lay cooked the books at Enron, he was sent to jail. The same needs to happen with those guilty of breaking the law at the highway department.”<br /><br />Hutchison’s response<br /><br />In response to the tolling controversy, U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, has filed legislation that would prohibit the tolling of existing federal highways across the country.<br /><br />“My bill will protect drivers from paying tolls on roads that were already paid for by taxpayers,” Hutchison said in a statement about her legislation, S. 2019.<br /><br />The legislation’s intent is to “prohibit the imposition and collection of tolls on certain highways constructed using federal funds,” by blocking the U.S. Secretary of Transportation from approving tolls on existing federally-funded highways. Under current law, states can apply to the U.S. Department of Transportation to place tolls on existing federal highways.<br /><br />In a press release from her office, Hutchison said she would “vigorously oppose” any effort by Texas Department of Transportation to toll existing interstate highways through the use of buy backs.<br /><br />Earlier this year, TxDOT officials said they intended to lobby Congress to allow for the buy back of existing federal highways in Texas for the purpose of tolling. Hutchison’s legislation specifically disallows states to place tolls on any federal highways they buy back from the DOT.<br /><br />“I will work with members of the Texas Congressional delegation and the state legislature to ensure that Texans are never asked to pay a toll of an existing interstate highway,” said Hutchison, who serves as a senior member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, which sets the budget for the federal Department of Transportation<br /><br />In February, TxDOT released its legislative agenda in a report called “Forward Momentum,” which seeks changes in federal law that would allow such buy backs for the purpose of tolling interstate highways, pending approval by local governments.<br /><br />S. 2019 is similar to a previous effort by Hutchison to block the use of tolls on existing interstate highways as part of the 2005 Highway Bill.<br /><br />The amendment passed the Senate but was stripped in conference by the House of Representatives.<br /><br />Cities fight to stop TTC<br /><br />The cities of Bartlett, Holland, Little River-Academy and Rogers recently formed the Eastern Central Texas Sub-Regional Planning Commission to fight the TTC.<br /><br />“This is one issue all four cities are united behind to save our rural way of life,” said newly elected president Mae Smith, who is mayor of Holland. Other members of the board include Arthur White, mayor of Bartlett; Ronnie White, mayor of Academy; the Rev. Billy Crow, mayor of Rogers; and Ralph Snyder, a business owner from Holland.<br /><br />“The purpose of this commission is to give us a voice in this process. It’s our land that the Texas Department of Transportation and our governor want to take and we are not going to let them pave us over and ignore the concerns of our communities,” Snyder said.<br /><br />The commission reports the TTC would take from 5,000 and 7,500 acres in Bell County alone, while taking in another 50,000 acres of farmland between San Antonio and the Texas-Oklahoma border. The Texas Legislature created the TTC in 2003 “and ever since, landowners have been fighting to protect their rights,” according to a press release from the commission.<br /><br />The commission was formed using Texas Local Government Code, Chapter 391, which allows cities and counties to form regional planning commissions to work together to develop plans for their local region and to force the state agencies to coordinate with their activities.<br /><br />Under Chapter 391.009(c), TxDOT is required to coordinate with commissions to ensure effective and orderly implementation of state programs at the regional level.<br /><br />“TxDOT must coordinate with us before they can implement their plans in our region,” said Ronnie White, commission vice president. “The TTC is driven by greed and has no respect for our rural way of life.”<br /><br />The commission says that under state law, TxDOT will be required to work with it and coordinate the agency’s plans with the local group before any land is taken or any construction begins.<br /><br />“If not, they are in violation of the state statute and we are prepared to take them to court if necessary,” Smith said.<br /><br />The individual cities have also requested that the Environmental Protection Agency reject the Draft Environmental Impact Statement submitted by TxDOT, because the agency did not coordinate with local government as required under the federal law.<br /><br />Waller County rejects proposal<br /><br />Waller County commissioners announced at a meeting in early August that they had been approached by TxDOT officials and Gary Bushell, a lobbyist for the Alliance for I-69 and the Gulf Coast Strategic Highway Coalition, with a plan to route the TTC along the proposed path of the Prairie Parkway, which had been recently discussed as a thoroughfare from Highway 290 between Waller and Prairie View (James Muse Road), to I-10 and Woods Road.<br /><br />Waller County commissioners rejected the proposal, according to a press release from Citizens for a Better Waller County.<br /><br />“For folks that think that the Trans-Texas Corridor is not going to happen - this is a major wake up call,” said Don Garrett, president of the citizens group. “Not only does it show that TxDOT and Gov. Perry are going forward with the plans for the TTC-69, but that they still have Waller County dead in their sights for the path of this 1,200-feet wide mobility monster.<br /><br />“Although there is a two-year moratorium that prevents TxDOT from signing a contract with a private company to build the TTC-69 under Senate Bill 792, that doesn’t mean that they can’t proceed forward with selecting a pathway for it,” he said.<br /><br />Garrett said he encourages people living in Waller County to stay aware of TxDOT’s plans.<br /><br />“An express toll road that is a 1/2 of a mile wide going through the dead center of Waller County would devastate it. It will change life as we know it in Waller County for generations to come,” Garrett said. “This move by TxDOT shows that they are still trying to route this thing through the middle of our county, despite the fact that nobody in Waller County wants it here.<br /><br />“We are not opposed to a rational approach to solving our future transportation needs, but are adamantly opposed to a system that primarily benefits Wall Street and foreign investors,” he said, saying the organization has confirmed TxDOT representatives have met with Fort Bend County officials in regard to routing TTC-69 through Fort Bend County toward Waller County.<br /><br />According to information from the organization, Prairie Parkway has been on the county’s thoroughfare plan since 1985 and has been updated because of development to Houston Executive Airport and expansion plans for I-10 and Highway 290. The route also will provide additional hurricane evacuation capabilities for coastal residents.<br /><br />“TxDOT saw an opportunity with the proposed Prairie Parkway to piggyback the TTC on top of it. It’s now up to the citizens of Waller County to let TxDOT know what they think about that,” Garrett said.<br /><br />A final route for TTC-69 is pending release of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement and additional hearings.<br /><br />“It is more important now than ever that people pay attention to what is going on around here,” Garrett said. “The TTC is alive and well and TxDOT is hoping that folks are asleep at the wheel when they show up with bulldozers.”<br /><br />© 2007 The Waxahachie Daily Light <blogitemurl><a href="http://www.waxahachiedailylight.com/articles/2007/09/09/dailylight/news/02-09-09-ttc.txt"> www.waxahachiedailylight.com </a></blogitemurl>Waller County SRPChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18322641167334940793noreply@blogger.com0