ANGRY RURAL LAND OWNERS RALLY> AGAINST CORRIDOR PLAN>

AUSTIN (AP) - Farmers and ranchers flocked to the Capitol on Tuesday> with their sights set on stopping Gov. Rick Perry's Trans-Texas> Corridor, a huge highway project rural land owners say will gobble up> their property.>

Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn - one of Perry's potential> Republican opponents in 2006 - joined the angry rally and called> Perry's associates "land-grabbing highway henchmen.">

"Governor Perry and his Department of Transportation want to cram toll> roads down Texans' throats. He calls it Trans-Texas Corridor. We call> it Trans-Texas Catastrophe," she said.>

A spokesman for Perry watched the rally and chastised Strayhorn for> criticizing toll roads. He cited records showing her support for them> in the past and said those who criticize should offer their own> transportation solutions.>

"Would they raise the gas tax by one dollar? ... Would they expand I-35> through our cities, which is some of the most expensive real estate in> the state? Or would they do nothing and continue to allow congestion to> increase?" Robert Black said.>

The Trans-Texas Corridor, proposed by Perry in 2002, would be a> 4,000-mile transportation network costing some $175 billion over 50> years. It would be financed mostly if not entirely by private money.> The road builders would then charge motorists tolls.>

"One, two, three, four. We don't want this corridor!" the yellow-clad> crowd shouted Tuesday, amid other chants and jeers. Many held signs> blasting the corridor.>

Corridor Watch, formed by Linda and David Stall of Fayetteville, says> at least 20 county commissioners' courts have passed resolutions> opposing the Trans-Texas Corridor.>

The land owners who rallied at the Capitol voiced support for a bill> that would place a two-year moratorium on development of the> Trans-Texas Corridor and on tolls for existing roads. But as the> legislative session enters its final month, the bill by Democratic Rep.> Garnet Coleman of Houston appears doomed in a House committee.>

Republican and Democratic legislators addressed the rally, urging that> limits be placed on the corridor plan.>

"The government is out of control. They're trying to take our property> rights away from us," said Rep. Harvey Hilderbran, R-Kerrville.>

Some in the crowd identified themselves as conservative Republicans and> said this was the first political rally they'd ever attended. Their> anger was clearly aimed at Perry.>

"I already wrote a note to his e-mail and said he needs to be run out> of town on a rail. But that's too good for him," said Betty Meischen of> Austin County.>

Meischen said one proposed corridor road would divide the 160-acre farm> that has been in her family for generations.>

Cattle rancher Leroy Bacak of El Campo and his wife, Laverne, said they> have two pieces of property totaling 250 acres. One corridor proposal> could place a major highway between the two, preventing the movement of> ranch equipment back and forth, Bacak said.>

Black, the spokesman for Perry, said the governor understands the> concerns of rural residents. That's why, he said, the governor asked> that the Trans-Texas Corridor law include a provision allowing land> owners whose property is taken for roads to receive fair market value> or another negotiated amount.>

However, he acknowledged that the state would have no obligation to pay> more than fair market value, and the owner would have no choice but to> give up the land.>

The Trans-Texas Corridor is an innovative way to deal with the state's> transportation needs and is becoming a model for the nation, Black> said.>

"We cannot continue to keep doing things the way we've done them in the> past," he said.>

The Trans-Texas Corridor moratorium bill is HB3363.>

On the Net: Corridor Watch ( http://www.corridor­watch.org ), Texas> Department of Transportation ( http://www.txdot.st­ate.tx.us )>

I live in New York and have been reading about TTC.>

The question that have as a non Texas Resident is why Texas proposes to give> away its roads to a private agency that can charge as much as they wish in> tolls.

That's not neccessarily true, Scott...some parts of the proposed I-69> corridor near Houston and near the Lufkin area do use highways that> were originally constructed as freeways with gas taxes....and AFAIK, no> other state other than Texas has proposed imposing tolls on any of> their proposed sections of I-69 (or any complimentary connections such> as the Memphis Outer Beltway or the Pine Bluff Connector.

And it's not as if the states have to put up all of the costs of> building such a highway, either...the Feds still pay the overwhelming> majority of the costs (80%),>

If I-69 is that important and provides such a benefit to those people,> then why not just fund it out of gas tax revenues or general funds, and> save the tolls for more peripheral projects???

And the real problem with privatized tolls is exactly that "profit> motive" you talk about: if fewer people decide to use the tollway, the> owners could just hike the tolls to the stratisphere to recoup their> profits off those who are willing to pay....and leave the existing> roadways clogged with the rejects.. In short, they put their profits> above the needs of the commuters.

As I said before, I'm not particularly against tollways in some limited> circumstances...but­ converting preexisting freeways to toll facilities> just to cover the profits of unaccountable private agencies is simply> too much risk, IMV. I'd much rather trust a public authority which is> accountable to the voters and taxpayers to finance such facilities;> otherwise, keep the freeways free and fund them adequately.

I still don't see why people would pay to travel on a toll highway when> there are more than adequate free alternatives to them. From what I> understand, the intercity interstates in TX, with the exception of I-35> between San Antonio and DFW, have more than enough capacity to handle> present and future traffic flows, and a third lane could easily be> added when the time comes. So why would I want to pay to travel when> the free road is perfectly adequate? Most of these TTC routes are> parallel to existing interstate facilities. Though I see that the> major cities are bypassed by them, so that could be an attraction.

The TTC highways would be new highways, so Texas wouldn't be privatizing> any existing highways. I don't see where private and public-private> highways will result in anyone making a "killing" financially, as the> likely return on investment will be in the realm of that of a public> utility, probably 10% or less per year. Highway administration is very> capital intensive, and building a major freeway will require huge> amounts of capital to be raised and amortized. If they overcharge on> tolls, traffic volumes will reduce in droves, perhaps leading to a> negative rate of return.>

-- > Scott M. Kozel Highway and Transportation History Websites> Virginia/Maryland/W­ashington, D.C. http://www.roadstot­hefuture.com> Philadelphia and Delaware Valley http://www.pennways­.com>

If the TTC is involved with the construction of new roads, what would> prevent truckers from using what ever existing highways that now exist to> avoid tolls.

When I think about utility companies my cable company comes to mind which> keeps raising their rates so that many folks go to using a dish. Will the> Texas Government have the authority to approve raises in tolls

The question comes to mind is why no thought has gone into creating an> authority such as the Pennsylvania Turnpike Authority to build these> highways which operates like a private company to build these highways and> also use the revenue created to build rail lines. The MTA in NewYork, an> independent state authority, operates both toll bridges and tunnels along> with commuter rail lines which also carry freight trains.

The question comes to mind is why no thought has gone into creating

authority such as the Pennsylvania Turnpike Authority to build these> highways which operates like a private company to build these