CTMRA must be open about roads
For the second time in less than two years — a year and six months to be exact — the environmental group Save Our Springs Alliance (SOS) has filed a lawsuit against the Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority.
To avoid the cost of unnecessary legal fees that potentially affect the cost of its projects, the mobility authority should share information requested on a public project. A determination about the relevance of the information should be left for the public to determine. Standing in the way of transparency fuels mistrust and speculation.
Much like last March, when SOS sought data on the proposed Texas 45 Southwest and its tolls, the nonprofit now seeks to force the mobility authority to release “sketch” traffic and revenue estimates from a consultant study of the proposed South MoPac express toll lanes.
Earlier this week, American-Statesman’s Ben Wear reported:
“...the projected South MoPac traffic figures” — cited in an Aug. 21 letter by Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center interim executive director Mike Abkowitz — “were several times higher than estimates by the Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority, which plans to build the Texas 45 Southwest tollway and the proposed express toll lanes on South MoPac. The letter said that MoPac south of Slaughter Lane, which now has less than 15,000 vehicles a day on it, would see 314,000 vehicles a day by 2035 if the tollways open.
“That is about 50 percent more traffic than on Interstate 35 in downtown Austin.
“After the American-Statesman questioned the figures, Abkowitz acknowledged Wednesday that his numbers were way off — traffic demand for a much broader area of the southern metro area was somehow attributed to MoPac alone, he said — and he apologized for the error. The mobility authority’s estimate for 2035, based on a traffic study done by a consultant in 2013, is that MoPac south of La Crosse Avenue would have about 44,000 vehicles a day in 2035.”
It’s the release of miscalculations like these that Mike Heiligenstein, the mobility authority’s executive director, told Wear could fog public discussion. Again, Wear wrote: “Heiligenstein said the traffic and revenue figures that (SOS Executive Director Bill) Bunch is seeking have been rendered inaccurate and irrelevant by a decision earlier this year to look at up to five alternative designs for the toll lanes. Releasing the estimates now would only cloud the debate, he said, pointing to the wildflower center’s inflated traffic numbers as an example.”
In both cases — the request for data on Texas 45 tolls and for data on South MoPac tolls — the mobility authority has argued that the information should be withheld from public disclosure because they are draft information exempted from disclosure under the Texas Public Information Act. In each case, the Attorney General’s Office released opinions siding with the agency. Here’s the thing: Citizens shouldn’t have to resort to filing lawsuits to get information on projects that are backed by taxpayer dollars.
It’s stances like these that lead to valid criticism and questions about the mobility authority’s motive. Answering questions and being transparent is not something the mobility authority should shy away from.
Taxpayers have the right to be informed fully throughout the process. Entities who choose to work on public projects, have to understand the scrutiny that comes with accepting the job. The mobility authority should know better.
GISSELA SANTA CRUZ
Fix needed for uninsured drivers
Fees are one of the Texas Legislature’s favorite ways to balance the budget. After all, the fees often make sense: charge the users (or abusers) of a service, not all taxpayers.
But over-reliance on fees can have unintended consequences, especially when the fees are so onerous that they disproportionately affect the poor.
On such case is the Texas Driver Responsibility program, created in 2003 by the Legislature. The program levies civil surcharges against people who are convicted of driving without a license or insurance, or driving while intoxicated, or who are habitual traffic offenders. The fees are on top of any criminal fines and court costs defendants pay. But rather than discouraging the behavior, the dynamics of poverty are such that many more illegal drivers are created, according to a story by American-Statesman reporter Eric Dexheimer.
The situation is so bad that a former Williamson County legislator, Mike Krusee, who helped write the law, is now asking the Legislature to scrap it.
In recent years, news reports, including a series by NPR in 2014, have illustrated the cumulative effects of the criminal justice system’s over-reliance on fees. Poor people break minor laws and are fined, which then forces them to break more laws and pay higher fines. Local law enforcement have resorted to a “catchand-release” method of citing offenders, in part because the numbers overwhelmed the criminal justice system. Those who are too poor to pay fines, are also too poor to pay bail and lawyers.
Certainly drivers who choose to drive illegally should be penalized, but it serves no one if the price is so high that they can never get on the right side of the law. In Texas, more than 1.3 million drivers currently have their licenses suspended through the surcharge program. The top reason: fees for driving without insurance and driving without a license.
Why does it matter? The next person they hit might be you.
TARA TROWER DOOLITTLE