Print đź–¨

The House Committee on Transportation met to hear invited testimony regarding interim charges related to efficacy of existing transportation finance mechanisms and feasibility of new ones, as well as, evaluating transparency and stakeholder responsiveness of various toll authorities.

This report is intended to give you an overview and highlight of the discussions on the various topics the committee took up. This report is not a verbatim transcript of the hearing; it is based upon what was audible or understandable to the observer and the desire to get details out as quickly as possible with few errors or omissions.

Study the efficacy of existing transportation finance mechanisms from state, regional, and local perspectives. Identify opportunities to improve existing transportation finance mechanisms and investigate the feasibility of developing new ones.

Bruce Bugg, Texas Transportation Commission

  • Thanked the legislature and governor for their work since the 84th legislative session on creating new funding streams leading to $35 billion of new funding
    • Created by Proposition 1, Proposition 7, and ending diversions
  • Allocated $29 billion for congestion relief with the expected population growth in mind
    • $23 billion in the 5 metropolitan areas
  • Category 1 maintenance funds across the state are adequate at this time

 

Brian Ragland, James Bass and Marc Williams, TxDOT

  • Discussed comptroller produced document showing the volatility of various taxes
    • TxDOT has the both the least volatile and the most volatile Taxes (fuel tax and natural gas and oil severance tax respectively)
    • Detailed state highway funding – very predictable and consistent as they are deposited on a monthly basis
    • The purchasing power of the revenue sources has decreased over time
    • Existing cash balance shows an over commitment but due to regular inflow of revenue the outflows are aligned with inflows on a long-term basis
  • TxDOT funding is directly dependent on the legislatures actions
  • Simmons – on prop 1 and prop 7, that money comes in as a lump sum once per year?
    • That is correct
  • Simmons – do you have a mechanism to normalize the cash flow?
    • With normalized funding we can borrow against that in the short term to smooth out the cash flow
    • Short term borrowing is not available for prop 1 and prop 7 funding
  • Simmons – is that due to a decision by the legislature?
    • It’s constitutional
  • Simmons – so you have not mechanism to normalize that?
    • Bass, TxDOT – when short term borrowing was created, there was a provision created and has not been utilized at this point, called HTRANS. There has not been a need to do that at this point, it is not constitutionally restricted but would require a distinct process
  • Simmons – would going through that process be helpful at this point?
    • We would need to know that the future revenue was coming in to be able to pay that back
    • We would know what to expect for this biennium, but we do not know what is coming in during the next biennium
  • Discussed how prop 7 works – first $2.5 billion of sales tax that comes in after the first $28 billion
    • Legislature has the ability to direct TxDOT to use a portion of that to pay prop 12 debt service
  • Pickett – prop 7 has 2 parts, in 2017 the legislature estimated that it would be a larger number than it is, have you worked those numbers into your estimates? One recommendation I would make is that the percentage – 35% is dedicated, change that to 75% dedicated. Discussed that the TxDOT budget is estimated and the issues there in.
    • Going to request that the legislature consider adding prop 1 and prop 7 together because the eligible uses of the funds are the same except that the legislative discretion on prop 7 to pay prop 12 debt service allowing the agency to manage cash more effectively even in the budget world
  • Pickett – hope that the committee makes recommendations relating to sunset provision in prop 1 and prop 7, does the unified transportation plan go beyond those sunset dates anticipating that the sunset provisions get extended?
    • Yes, estimating that prop 1 extends beyond the sunset date for planning purposes, which is different that committing dollars in a contract
  • Pickett – important that we extend the sunset dates. Chairman mentioned that diversions had been ended but there is a tradeoff, only GR was for debt service and the appropriators took that away. Because there is no GR the debt service comes off of the top of those new revenue sources.
    • From a planning standpoint, only reduced the UTP by $613 million for 18-19
    • For 2020 and after planning on that money coming in to TxDOT programs and not be used for debt service
    • If the legislature continues using prop 7 to pay off prop 12 then will need to go to the commission to discuss changing the UTP
  • Pickett – over planning has a down side, anticipating the continuation of using prop7 to pay off prop12, again recommend changing the percentage on the second half of prop. what are the numbers we anticipate in 2015 and what the comptroller has now estimated the revenue estimates?
    • Do not believe the comptroller has publicly released that information yet
    • On the additional portion coming in 2020, we do track that now, and if it was in existence today the amount into the state highway fund would be zero because it des not meet the thresholds
  • Because of the differences in the way the traditional funding works and the way we have managed that over the years and the prop 1 and prop 7 coming in large chunks on an annual basis the highway fund has a high cash balance
  • Simmons – what investment restrictions do you have on the cash?
    • Its just in the treasury pool with the comptroller
    • The most conservative investments
  • Simmons – id we did an analysis of the balances of that over time, it is very volatile? In all the funds?
    • In the past it would be flat at $200-300 million per month if you don’t count the bond sources we have had in the past
    • now there is in excess of $3 billion and then drop down to $2 billion. The minimum carry is $1.5-2 billion that could be invested
  • Simmons – are you statutorily restricted to having the comptroller invest that with out increasing the risk to make more?
    • That would be a better question for the comptroller
  • Israel – what percent of the budget is based on prop1 and prop 7 dollars?
    • Prop 1 is 9.4%
    • Prop 7 is 10.9%
    • So roughly 20%
  • Israel – prop 1 and prop 7 was the states attempt to step up to the plate for the transportation crisis and not increasing the gas tax, what % of the budget is based on the motor fuels tax?
    • About 18%
  • Israel – would like to see TxDOT address technology changes that steer away from gas-based technologies
    • We are aware, but a large factor is the rate of adoption
  • Israel – asked for additional information on state motor fuel revenue slide from written testimony
    • Chart depicts what the revenue is worth today because there is no inflation factor
    • Only getting about 1/3 of what we were getting in the 90s off of this revenue

 

Brianne Glover, Texas A&M Transportation Institute

  • Provided written testimony
  • Reviewed charts showing mix of transportation funds for FY 2018
    • Federal funds – 35%
    • State Motor Fuels Tax, registration fees and prop 1 funds
  • Pickett – the state gas tax shows 21%, were guessing 18%. including prop 7 changes those numbers a little?
    • That is correct
  • Texas ranks 31st in state gas excise tax and 42nd in total gas taxes and fees
    • Total gas taxes and fees includes sales tax on gas, etc.
  • Burkett – you are talking about the rate not the income, correct?
    • That is correct
  • Texas ranks 17th in registration fees and 44th in total vehicle taxes and fees
  • TTI has a web-based tool to help break down transportation funding and uses from 2008 to 2018
    • Data comes from NCSL data, AASHTO and TTI independent research
    • 30 states have enacted legislation regarding motor fuels taxes
    • 15 states enacted legislation relating to electric and alternative fuels
    • 14 states have enacted tolling legislation
    • In 2017 5 states enacted public-private legislation
  • Pickett – do you have any information on how tolls are done in other states? With regional authorities or if the state is the overall purveyor?
    • It varies but will provide additional information beyond the written testimony

 

Rob Latsha, Texas Bond Review Board

  • Written testimony depicts state transportation debt outstanding by fiscal year and the entities that have issued that debt
  • 5 largest local revenue issuers of revenue debt are listed
    • North Texas tollways is the largest
  • Israel – between the state and the local entities which are responsible for transportation projects are in debt to $13.8 billion?
    • That is correct at the local level, the state is at about $21.8 billion
  • Pickett – do you have a total of the revenue produced?
    • We are only curators of debt not revenue at the local level
  • Pickett – that would need to be collected independently?
    • Yes, but work with OAG in their process of approving local securities and are able to see local debt service schedules at that point
  • Picket – not afraid that there is not enough revenue to pay the $14 billion in debt, curious as to what is additionally needed for the bonding capability and how to go about obtaining that
    • Do collect information from TxDOT but are not provided local information
  • Israel – would like to get a summary of cities and counties that do mobility projects which are not included in this documentation

 

Adam McGough, City of Dallas Councilmember

  • DFW growing at very fast pace
  • Need to enhance street design to handle multimodal transportation options
  • 11 million residents expected by 2045
  • Congestion in DFW is a widely felt frustration
    • Many experience 1.5-hour additions to commute due to congestion
    • Study shows drivers waste 45 hours per year in traffic in the DFW area
  • North Central Texas Council of Governmental Mobility 2040 Plan shows less than 1/3 of funding necessary to solve the congestion problem
  • DFW region identified $431.5 billion in transportation needs
    • $18 billion is expected to be available through 2040
  • Concern over toll roads has led to use of optional toll managed lanes providing choice for drivers
  • Proposes a test: does the funding generated from optional toll lanes close the funding gap and meet feasibility thresholds, will the optional tool lane provide sustainable congestion relief over time and is there consensus support for optional tool lanes on a project by project basis
    • If the toll lane meets all of these goals then TxDOT should be able to include the optional toll lane in the project
    • Described a specific example in Dallas (LBJ East Project) of an optional toll that meets all of these requirements and has been effective
    • Received support from many regional partners
  • Those who oppose toll roads recognize a difference between toll roads and optional toll lanes
  • Burkett – do you translate time wasted to dollars wasted in your research?
    • Have not other than anecdotal examples
    • Would expect it to be a high number
  • Burkett – mentioned a $600 million funding gap on the LBJ East Project, what is the cost increase as we wait?
    • Number that has been given, roughly $5 million additional every 30 days
    • Also includes 1.5 -2 deaths over 30 days on this stretch of highway
    • Considered including vehicle accident data, but the information was very cumbersome
  • Burkett – looking at 635 east not completed and seeing businesses on the side closing, concern over cost to business and commerce. Has any of that been measured?
    • Do not have specific data, but spoke anecdotally regarding effect on business
    • Generally negative effect on business
  • Pickett – heavy-handed tactics re: toll roads lead to bad projects & TxDOT forced these by excluding communities from funding if projects were not implemented
  • Pickett – there are future dollars that need to be captured, there is revenue into perpetuity on this project ($2-3 billion) and if there is a $600 million shortfall there has to be a way to bring that in
  • Pickett – Sunset bill says that if TxDOT cedes a project in the future that is producing revenue it should be paid back
  • Pickett – what else can we ask of you in the future to get this off dead center? A higher commitment on the back end?
    • We need to see what table to be at, we don’t know as a region what answer gets us past that goal line
  • Pickett – if we seed your project to begin with, the statute says you have to pay that back, I think the state should be collecting a portion of the revenues in perpetuity
    • The important part is ensuring the maintenance of the road
  • Pickett – I agree, this is where TxDOT needs to come to the table, there needs to be a partnership with the state. Would you consider adding future dollars into the mix?
    • I think everything is on the table
  • Pickett – have a toll project in El Paso at $630 million the regional mobility authority will be operating it as all tolled, without borrowing anything, TxDOT gave us $630 million. People should be upset about that. Why did El Paso get $630 million for that and get to keep all of the tolls?
  • Burkett – I think the money for 635 projects all go to TxDOT anyway right?
    • That is correct
  • Burkett – the in perpetuity is what concerns me, looking all things on the table and continue looking at optional toll lanes and tweak that into some kind of hybrid regarding the “in perpetuity” or shortening the timeline
  • Israel – around 04-08 we were dealing with inaction from the state and Dallas was pushing for a funding option at the local level, what is the political climate regarding that for the upcoming session?
    • Would defer that question to another witness

 

Bobby Jenkins, Austin Chamber of Commerce

  • Discussed his business which relies on transportation infrastructure
  • Increasingly concerned with infrastructure, especially I 35, as population growth continues in Austin
    • TTI ranks I 35 as 2nd most congested road in Texas and is consistently one of the most congested in the state
    • $218 million lost and 1.3 million hours in delay due to that congestion
  • Delays directly impact business and quality of service
  • Quality of life is difficult to quantify but is very effected by transportation issues
  • Solutions – need to provide TxDOT with every available solution
    • Includes using Prop 1 and Prop 7 funding
    • Need ability to use other funding mechanisms like managed lanes
  • Managed lanes are appealing to business owners for numerous reasons including savings to the business and quality of life for employees
  • Revenue generated by managed lanes would provide additional funding for areas of the state where that is not an option
  • Strongly recommends managed lanes be considered
  • Business community in Austin are concerned with infrastructure to the future viability of Austin for new employment opportunities
  • Pickett – it has been discussed that toll 130 may have been developed further east than necessary, but if the state were to remove the toll on 1230 and relieve some of the through traffic would that be beneficial? Do you use 130?
    • Confirmed use of 130
    • I think the Austin Chamber would consider something like that
    • Cannot not do anything, must take some action
  • Pickett – you have TxTags on all your vehicles?
    • That is correct
    • Productivity is everything for the business, considered an investment for the business
  • Thompson – do you do any tracking of mileage driven on the toll roads? Sperate from all roads, additionally the number of accidents on toll roads as opposed to non-toll roads?
    • Have not but will consider that
    • The loss control part is huge to the business and having that analysis would be very helpful
  • Thompson – there could be a safety issue that may need to be a part of this discussion

 

Mike Heiligenstein, Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority

  • Briefly described CTRMA
    • Governor appoints the board
    • Operate under Transportation Code 370 and are authorized to issue revenue bonds to fund projects
    • No government entity backs bonds
  • Mechanism/process gone through with MPOs
    • MPOs vote to put anything in long range plan
    • Last vote was unanimous for all projects wanted and needed in central Texas for both toll and non-toll projects
  • There are a number of financing tools and access to those is critical
  • All funds to central Texas over the next 10 years is about $1.6 billion
    • Not enough to get the projects completed (need about $4-8 billion)
  • 183 south project had $750 million in bonds sold with TxDOT grant of $147 million
    • 6 tolled lanes and 6 non-tolled lanes
    • Over subscribed by 10 X = $8 billion from investors around the world
  • Used banks in the past and are able to borrow short term money if needed
  • Do not do P3s, but would like to
  • Utilizes federal level transportation act
  • Goal was to get to the point where outside dollars were not necessary, and the next few projects do not use any
  • Committee should consider what if anything does come out from new administration and ensuring that we are ready to accept those dollars
  • CTRMA has considered local option in the past but was not well received
  • Discussed Cedar Park Project: added $700 million to tax base
  • Pickett – more capacity is the answer; do you have any plans on paying off particular tolled projects or is the plan to be in perpetuity?
    • Depending on the project it will go into the system in perpetuity
    • There are 3 roads that are and had to be for the financing
  • Pickett – the discussion must be around that. The other question is what do you think about 5% of total revenues going to the state to benefit the entire system?
    • Would push back because the promise originally was that the revenue produced by the CTRMA would stay in central Texas because we were taxing citizens in the region
    • 1/3rd of every project is non-tolled
  • Pickett – do you agree you cannot to the work without TxDOT going forward?
    • Of 4 tolled projects, 3 of those could be done without any state aid
    • Able to do that because we can get revenue bonds
  • Pickett – there will always be more people that use non-tolled lanes than will use them, solving the congestion problem must include solving the issue with the fewest toll lanes possible
  • Pickett – what is the difference between the current debt service and the revenues projected?
    • Total revenues projected will be around $90 million
    • Debt service will be $45 million
  • Pickett – if all regional mobility authorities were eliminated and the state ran everything then the state would be generating that $45 million to redistribute across the state, instead you are generating $45 million because you can
    • Again, the promise is that those funds stay in the region
  • Israel – does Capitol Metro pay for any use of the toll lanes or managed toll lanes?
    • No
  • Israel – understand that ridership has gone up on the express bus, suggested having those numbers available for future discussions

 

Renee Green, Bexar County Alamo Regional Mobility Authority

  • 3 types of funding that Bexar County Alamo RMA uses
    • Advanced Transportation District sales tax – authorized by voters in 2004 (50% to the transit system, 25% to city of San Antonio, and 25% to TxDOT transportation system)
    • Public improvement district where local property owners vote to tax themselves
    • Additional vehicle registration fee
  • Briefly discussed additional vehicle registration fee
  • Reviewed what the three funding sources went towards
    • 825 Plan: county, city and TxDOT plan to expand 281, Loop 1604 and IH 610
    • County provided $192 million for non-tolled expansion
    • Alamo RMA provided $70 million for non-tolled expansion
  • Bexar County has done 6 passthrough projects, 3 have been completed, two are in construction and will be completed next year and SH 211 is waiting on private acquisition by landowners
    • Valued at $169.8 million provided to TxDOT
  • Described 14 specific regional projects as listed in written testimony backed by additional vehicle registration fee
    • Represents a total cost of $271 million – RMA is funding $179 million of which $102 million is for TxDOT system non-tolled
  • ATD Sales tax authorized by voters – county has provided $297.1 million in TxDOT projects all non-tolled
  • Total local investment in non-tolled expansion has been $540 million between Bexar County and Alamo RMA
  • Bexar County and Alamo RMA local non-tolled investment on TxDOT system has been $464 million
  • Pickett – why haven’t you toyed with transportation reinvestment zones?
    • The one area that it was doable was in an undeveloped area and able to work with investors, with other roadways there is already enough development that would limit the benefit
  • Pickett – do you have tolled managed lane projects?
    • There are 2, one is Loop 1604 North which will add 2 lanes at a cost of over $800 million and toll revenue would support $500 million
  • Pickett – discussed design costs of toll roads
  • E Thompson – if you don’t have toll roads in your area, how are you able to count on the revenue and how do you get to that revenue number?
    • RMA did a level traffic and revenue study which showed a value of time leading to a reliable price per mile

 

Peter Key, Harris County Toll Road Authority

  • All major decisions are made at public meeting by elected officials (county commissioners and judge)
  • Supported by property tax revenue bonds
  • Toll revenues have always been sufficient for debt service and operations and maintenance
  • Established in 2007 an annual mobility fund transfer valued at $120 million annually
    • Pays for county non-toll road projects
  • Used system financing to acquire ship channel bridge and developed the remainder of the bridge system
    • Using system financing to pay for replacement bridge
  • Growth of the system over 35 years has enabled county to deliver toll and non-toll projects without being dependent on state or federal financing
    • Helps keep debt at manageable level
  • County contributes toll revenue for regionally significant non-toll projects
    • US 290 corridor
    • 200 million for highway projects in the region
  • Pickett – Austin’s RMA net amount in $45 million per year, what is your total debt?
    • About $2 billion
    • $200 million annual debt service
    • $800 million annual revenue
  • Pickett – that’s a $600 million positive revenue stream annually?
    • Do have roughly $250 million annually in Maintenance and operations
    • The mobility fund transfer of $120 million
  • Pickett – that’s $230 million in positive revenue
  • Pickett – how much of these projects did the state seed initially?
    • In 1983 we went to the voters in Harris County
  • Pickett – what was the first project?
    • The first one was the Hardy Toll road
  • Pickett – the state of Texas has participated in the funding of some of these projects
    • TxDOT is a vital partner in these projects
  • Pickett – you would be opposed to 5% of revenues going back to the state?
    • The agency would not recommend that to the commissioners
  • Pickett – do you have any toll projects you are planning to pay off and ending?
    • Not in the near time
    • Stressed that collaboration in projects both ways with TxDOT is critical to the whole system
  • Israel – its not a solution to keep doing non-tolled lanes, can you speak to the Katy roadway issues?
    • The project needed to be done, and enabled significant growth in the community
  • Israel – would you have done the Katy project differently if it were done over?
    • For almost any project of that scope and size, there are always things that could have been differently
  • E Thompson – one thing left out of the expansion of the Katy expansion is that you reach a choke point which complicated that project, and it is a project in progress. As they continue to expand that project it will continue to improve

 

Will Conley, Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization

  • TxDOT and Hays County have been in a 12-year agreement and have built over a half a billion dollars in highway improvement
  • It didn’t feel natural at first for counties and state to work together on highway development, but it has made both better representatives and better projects
  • There needs to be a sense of urgency to meet the demand of these funding gaps in community development

 

Arturo Ballesteros, North Texas Tollway Authority

  • NTTA is organized in Chapter 366 of Transportation code as a regional tollway authority
  • NTTA supports the increased general revenue in investments and projects
  • Recommend keeping toll roads on the list as a possible funding mechanism
  • NTTA reinvested $179 million in capital projects in 2017 alone
  • Pickett – Do you know what the debt service is?
    • It’s just over $9 billion in debt
    • Pickett – And the debt service?
    • In 2017 the net debt service was just over $450 million
    • Pickett – What are the revenues?
    • Total for 2017 were $805 million
    • Pickett – What are the net revenues that NTTA gets in a year?
    • That nets out to 0 after you take out the MNO, capital projects, and our debt service
    • Pickett – What does NTTA have available?
    • That capital projects number is the $179 million a year that the board recommits

 

Lee Kleinman, City of Dallas Councilmember

  • Other than the problems with 635E, another big problem is with 35W north of Fort Worth
  • DFW is growing at an unparalleled pace and there are some immediate needs that need to addressed like the 635E and 35W projects
  • The region leveraged $7 billion of state funding into $21 billion of projects over the last 10 years
  • Just voted for a $500 million bond program for all their thoroughfares and street systems using local and match funds
  • The financing they need for these projects have to come from multiple sources and that is something people often forget
  • Simmons – What does Dallas do when someone comes in and wants to do a development that would add a lot of people coming to that and would increase the traffic flow?
    • When a proposal comes before the Council they require a strong transportation management plan that addresses what the current traffic looks like, what the traffic under the existing zoning may be, and what will be the traffic effect
    • If there will be major additional project, they have to look to their funding to manage that traffic
    • Simmons – Since there is some limitation on what can be done with propositions with those like prop 1 & 7, believes the local people should be able to decide how the infrastructure regarding those props will be built
    • The local desire right now is to put these managed toll lands into place
  • Burkett – How long have you been on the RTC?
    • Almost 5 years
    • Burkett – Since 635E has been at the top of the priority list for a while now, what’s stopped it?
    • Financing
    • Burkett – How much money would the city get if they stopped doing deferrals?
    • Does not know number, probably about $1 billion
    • Burkett – Do you have any advice for paying for these mega projects other than tolling?
    • The Transportation Commission has put together their TX Clear Lanes initiative to fund these mega projects but it’s still complicated and we’re looking at billions of need
    • Burkett – Can you expand on what environmental justice is?
    • When we do an environmental impact statement, that includes everything around it and how it will impact the community and if it will have a detrimental effect
    • Making sure it doesn’t split the community, have a negative financial impact, or negatively impact other communities
  • Pickett – Is there any portion of 635E that could be considered as a transportation reinvestment zone for the future?
    • Believes there’s some but not a lot and they are receptive to it
    • Pickett – Have you talked about a referendum for the people along 635?
    • They’ve been attending meetings along that corridor for years, their most recent meeting had 300 people show up all wanting it to get done
    • Pickett – How many municipalities does it cross?
    • Within the corridor we’re talking about alone it’s Dallas and Mesquite; Richardson is just north of the corridor and south includes Sunnyvale, and east includes cities like Rockwall
    • Pickett – Are there any TRZ’s that might have to be created for these municipalities?
    • Yes, that’s likely
    • Pickett – Follow up question for Arturo, how much does NTTA have in their reserve fund?
    • Arturo – Needs to ask their finance director for that specific number
    • Pickett – Besides the $179 million, do you have any major projects planned with the reserve fund?
    • Arturo – It would include the 4th lane expansions to several existing projects
    • Kleinman – With the MPO the RTR fund has about a billion in it

 

Study Texas’ various toll authorities and evaluate their transparency and stakeholder responsiveness. Make recommendations to improve the state oversight of toll authorities.

Brian Ragland, TxDOT

  • TxDOT has interoperability with all of the tolling entities in TX and ones in Kansas, Florida, Georgia, South & North Carolina, and also beginning work with entities on the east and west coast
  • The Sunset bill last session provides for a maximum of $48/year late fees
  • The legislation made some payment changes for toll road subscribers and updated several fee structures
  • They have a veteran toll discount program, where certain veteran plates receive discounts
  • Chair Morrison – Do you have any idea on what that amount is?
    • It’s on page 13 of slides provided and it is growing
    • The number of plates a veteran can sign up for is unlimited and they all receive a waiver
    • Chair Morrison – What is the criteria?
    • As long as it’s the registered owner of the vehicles who is the veteran
    • James Bass – Who is eligible to receive those plates is overseen by the DMV
    • Bass – The law says that if the discount is going to be offered to one plate it’ll be offered to all
  • Pickett – Addressing Mr. Bass, what’s the status with the commission on the recent controversy with toll collection?
    • Bass, TxDOT – March 1, is being considered a new day with the system
    • All of the earlier late fees are no longer being pursued
    • The complication is with the SEC on not having selective disclosure so we’re working on a way to make the entirety of the market aware
    • Pickett – Going forward, how are you going to work on collecting future debt?
    • There will now be monthly late fees of $4 for each month late, it will be capped at $48
    • Pickett – How often are you going to be sending an invoice for using a toll road?
    • The invoice will be monthly as much as possible depending on what time someone takes the toll during the billing cycle
    • This information is all online and can be found through the call centers
  • Israel – How would the section of 130 that was going to add another lane be paid for?
    • Bass, TxDOT – Through a trust estate of the Central TX Turnpike System – no state funds or taxpayer dollars
    • Israel – Can you explain why it stalled other toll projects?
    • Initially the directive was no more toll lanes
    • Israel – How do you explain the lack of transparency on something like that?
    • We implement policy as TxDOT staff so as the legislators make policy, it’s not our job to question it, just to implement it
    • As TxDOT, it’s not our job to provide the reasoning behind policy decisions

 

Terri Hall, Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom

  • TURF wants all tollways abolished, toll managers have not been transparent and have run astray
  • There are 7 areas that need greater accountability:
    • Reduce cost
    • End system financing
    • Stop profiting off congestion and solve it
    • End congestion pricing
    • Stop tax payer funded lobbying by toll entities
    • End the public subsidies to toll roads
  • Public can’t hold these agencies accountable but TxDOT can
  • Provided documentation of toll entity unaccountability in written documents
  • Chair Morrison – What do you mean by stop profiting from congestion and solve it?
    • The idea of putting managed toll lands on roads to give people the option to avoid congestion are the entities’ way of being able to profit from congestion
  • Pickett – If you believe us that there’s not enough money to solve congestion problems, what solutions would you support to substitute for tolls?
    • Some things that we have been discussing would be to cut our federal ties to gas taxing, using initiatives similar to those of Nebraska
  • Pickett – is there nothing that you would support that doesn’t exist today? Is a gas tax off the table?
    • At the state level it is harder than at the federal level because 25% goes to public schools
  • Pickett – further discussed raising the gas tax
    • Big picture, 1,000 people moving to the state every day and are paying gas tax at the pump. The buying power of that revenue has been decreased due to inflation.
  • Pickett – proposals so far have not asked the taxpayers for any more out of their pocket
    • Toll roads do
    • Believes that there is a lot of misallocation of funds requiring the need for additional tolls and toll roads
  • Pickett – what if a gas tax was proposed to pay off the debt with a sunset?
    • Absolutely, would like to work with the legislature
    • Until we end system financing, do not think you will get any cooperation

 

Mike Heiligenstein, Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority

  • This agency has evolved into what the Texas Legislature envisioned a decade ago
  • We have delivered projects in an efficient and cost-effective manner
  • Currently have four projects going on right now
  • On the oversight issue, we do have independent and external audits required by law
  • Also subject to single audits and required annual report
  • The most important audit we go through is with our local MPOs

 

Renee Green, Bexar County Alamo Regional Mobility Authority

  • Has most of the same information Mike had
  • Handed out an example of a report that they are required to send out
  • To continue operating as an RMA they have to file over 17 reports
  • There is an extremely large amount of oversight existing currently, existing oversight is sufficient

 

Peter Key, Harris County Toll Road Authority

  • Governed by Harris County Commissioners Court
  • All major decisions are made at public meetings by elected officials
  • We operate a local service call center as well as many other entities in order to remain transparent
  • We do not use postpaid or pay by mail as billing options
  • E Thompson – What are the fees that you aren’t collecting that you send to the third party, what percent is that over a year? And what do you pay that third party?
    • About a 3% of the population don’t pay the tolls right away, but then an even smaller percent do not pay and we turn those over to a lawyer, I can get you the actual number
  • Martinez – How many more projects do yall have in line for the next year?
    • We have a number of projects that are currently on going, and then we also have projects with future phases to them, $2 billion today
  • Martinez – Have any of those projects been put on hold?
    • No, because we undertake system financing We do not rely on state or federal funding

 

Arturo Ballesteros, North Texas Tollway Authority

  • NTTA conducts an annual internal and external audit
  • Our bond rating speaks to the level of our transparency, we have an A bond rating
  • We work hard to keep our finger on the pulse of what our customers need from us
  • We have a 97% customer satisfaction rate that is 3rd party verified
  • Burkett – In your customer satisfaction, do yall have any satisfaction for property owners that run along the toll?
    • Yes we do, mainly for the people driving on it
  • Burkett – What about for the noise, sound wall issues, that’s what I’m asking, looks like we need to look at that because these are the complaints I hear about
  • Martinez – Are relying on any funds from the state to come in and help fund your projects?
    • We are self-sustaining
  • Burkett – Wants to know who did the immanent domain on one of their projects
    • Will get this for you
  • Israel – While you all reported on how wonderful you are, in relation to what we have been talking about today, do you have any suggestions for us on legislative remedies
    • Renee Green- More local option

 

Mike Stone, Fort Bend County Toll Road Authority

  • We have a separate authority for one toll so we can keep the finances separate but they are run by the same people
  • We operate 3 toll roads
  • 2% of all the transactions on our road are nonrevenue.
  • We like tags because tags cause less than a penny, but video tags cost a dime
  • We have made big changes on how we treat tagless customers
  • E Thompson – You have a different situation than most because you have a road that is tolled and not tolled. There could be some confusion to this. How do you deal with that?
    • This wasn’t by choice this was an agreement by TxDOT.

 

Pete Sepulveda, Cameron County Regional Mobility Authority

  • In Cameron County, we utilize numerous needs of transportation
  • The projects we are doing are well thought out and will help keep people connected
  • It is important that we have legislative tools in order to give us flexibility in developing these projects efficiently
  • We have undergone audits at the local and state levels
  • We have excellent relationships with our local government partners in the region
  • We have worked with the Cameron County Commissioners Court to gain funding for numerous projects including the first county wide transportation reinvestment zone
  • Martinez – How many projects do you currently have that are on hold?
    • Were informed in December that there were 4 projects on hold, SH 550 gap 1 project, SH 550 gap 2 project, SPI Second Access Project, Outer Parkway project
    • Worked through issues on SH 550 gap 1 with TxDOT and now progressing
    • Also have expansion projects for Outer Parkway to connect to other roads
  • Martinez – Do you have any toll projects that have been stopped?
    • 3 toll projects have been stopped, change in toll policy at TxDOT level
  • Martinez – Concerned that our projects in the Valley are getting held back, but no one else’s is?
    • We get held back because we use TxDOT money in preliminary phases
    • 3 projects on hold right are of concern
    • Needed to look at another alternative to I-2 on the North side, found an alternative parallel work and are working with TxDOT and RMAs

 

Chris Miller, Northeast Texas Regional Mobility Authority

  • We have the same responsibilities in terms of audits and oversight
  • Northeast RMA has a unique set up, 12 counties and Harrison County has a port, probably the largest area geographically, though lower on population
  • Our signature project is Toll 49, 26.5 miles currently and Segment 4 is underway to extend North from I-20, also working on environmental portions on Segment 6 to make a loop near Tyler
  • Existing tollway will be up to 32 miles soon, road is essentially in Smith County and could expand to Gregg and Upshur, excited about this project
  • Recently completed an audit and can provide
  • Held first-ever transportation forum, sought to involve 11 counties without toll road sections currently, open to involve legislators as well to help inform members

 

Closing Remarks

  • This hearing concludes those on interim charges, Chair Morrison thanks the committee for its participation, will begin writing the interim report