Texas Department of Transportation Commission Meeting

Dewitt Greer Building
125 East 11th Street
Austin, Texas

9:00 a.m. Thursday, March 30, 2000 Regular Meeting

COMMISSION MEMBERS:

DAVID M. LANEY, Chair
ROBERT L. NICHOLS
JOHN W. JOHNSON

DEPARTMENT STAFF:

CHARLES W. HEALD, Executive Director
HELEN HAVELKA, Executive Assistant, Engineering Operations

PROCEEDINGS

MR. LANEY: It is 9:08 a.m., and I'd like to call the meeting of the Texas Transportation Commission to order. Public notice of this meeting, containing all items of the agenda, was filed with the Office of the Secretary of State at 9:35 a.m. on March 22.

I welcome all of you to this March 30 commission meeting, and as has become a custom at our meetings, I'd like to, first of all, welcome you all, and then give the opportunity to the other two members of the commission to make a few comments before we get into our business.

Robert?

MR. NICHOLS: Thank you very much. I have two items I wanted to bring up: the first has to do with the recognition, second has to do with some funding issues.

On the recognition one, I would like to ask Pete Winstead, Chairman of the Texas Turnpike Authority, to come to the podium for a recognition.

MR. WINSTEAD: Thank you. Mr. Nichols, Chairman Laney, Member Johnson, thank you very much for letting me be here today.

It's my great pleasure to interrupt these proceedings, I guess, to read a resolution that was passed by the Texas Turnpike Authority and it reads as follows:

"Whereas, in his capacity as Chairman of the Transportation Commission, David Laney was instrumental in the formation of the Texas Turnpike Authority as a division of the Texas Department of Transportation;

"And whereas, David Laney has been a member of the TTA Board of Directors since its inception on September 1, 1997;

"And whereas, during his tenure on the board, David Laney has provided valuable insight on TTA matters and has been an important supporter of the TTA and its activities;

"And whereas, David Laney's contributions to the work of the TTA will benefit the State of Texas for many years to come;

"Now, therefore, be it resolved that the board hereby expresses its appreciation to David Laney for his service on the TTA Board and the valuable role he has played in the formation and the operation of the TTA and for the contribution he has made through his efforts for the benefit of the citizens of the State of Texas."

David, this resolution was signed by all of the members of the Turnpike Board of Directors on February 15, 2000, and we'd like you to step down for a little presentation of our appreciation.

Mr. Nichols, if you'd join me, I'd appreciate it -- as the new board member.

MR. LANEY: One comment first: it sounds like a eulogy.

(General laughter.)

MR. NICHOLS: I'd ask for a watch.

MR. WINSTEAD: We still need your help.

This passed, by the way, David, four-three. I guess I should say that.

(General laughter; pause for photos; applause.)

MR. NICHOLS: The second item I wanted to make a comment on --

MR. LANEY: Hold it. I didn't give you any authority to go any farther than you've already gone.

(General laughter.)

MR. LANEY: Go ahead.

MR. NICHOLS: Okay -- has to do with funding. Everybody, I believe, is aware of the TEA-21 funding the state got and the publicity related to that which has been wonderful for the state of Texas on federal reimbursements. The estimate of 90 cents on the dollar, a guarantee of 90 cents on the dollar, a portion of that formula was based on federal discretionary authority on projects, and it was estimated that Texas would receive its fair share with that discretionary. What has actually occurred in the past two years, the discretionary authority has pretty much short-changed Texas.

A couple of examples. There was a special provision for discretionary funding on NAFTA border and corridor improvements, $120 million, $130 million to be disbursed. The state of Texas, obviously, has 80 percent of the traffic with Mexico which was the major NAFTA explosion, and Texas only received $12 million, $14 million, in that range, of that category, whereas, we had 80 percent of the traffic. Other states like Arkansas received like $12 million, Indiana, and so on.

Another example would be the interstate rehabilitation. Texas has more miles of interstates than any state in the union; we are absolutely number one. In the rehabilitation discretionary disbursements of a hundred-and something million dollars, we were not even in the top ten that was disbursed.

So because we are falling short in these discretionary things, our 90 cents that we estimated has dropped into the 84 to 85 cent, which makes it even more difficult to fund projects. We just wanted to make those of you in the audience aware of that.

And other than to say how much we appreciate all of you taking the time out of your days to come to the commission to present to us your projects and concerns on transportation, we very much appreciate the difficulties you have in doing that and thank you for the effort.

With that, I'll pass it on.

MR. LANEY: Thanks, Robert.

Let me just add to that. Robert and a number of you in this room and a number of folks around the state are hard at work in trying to develop funding strategies that we expect to roll out in the 2001 session. To the extent you can get involved or are already involved, we'd very much appreciate the continued support on that front.

It is taking very interesting and I think very productive shape, short of a fuel tax hike, just so you'll know that. We're not looking at that as an alternative right now, but we are looking at some very interesting avenues of rationing up the level of funding that would allow us to address projects like the projects we're going to hear from several delegations on this morning, and we are very strapped, as you all probably know, from a project funding standpoint, both on the design and the construction side.

So, Robert, my hat's off to you in leading that charge and to all of you in the audience today that are involved.

Johnny, any comments?

MR. JOHNSON: Thank you, David.

I wanted to touch on an issue, the issue of clean air, and using the word touch is probably not an appropriate verb, it probably ought to be much stronger than that.

When we discuss clean air and development and mobility in today's considerations, they probably all need to be rolled in together. We have Houston in a conformity lapse; we have several areas in the state that are nonattainment; we have several areas in the state which are headed towards nonattainment. And I wanted to assure everyone who is here and those across the state that clean air is an issue that this commission and the other agencies in the state that deal with these particular issues is probably in the uppermost of our minds and work ethics.

Our commission and the TNRCC commission have met together on one occasion; we will meet again in June, and these are issues that cannot be downplayed as to their importance. They're significant in all the areas of this state, because what happens in the nonattainment areas affects the other areas of the state in terms of commerce.

So I wanted to assure you that clean air and mobility and development are things that we sort of merge together, and clean air is a very important issue and we're not going to let this thing get away from us.

Thank you.

MR. LANEY: Thanks, Johnny.

I second that. Air is our principal obstacle at this point, and we're going to face tremendous frustrations initially in Houston and Dallas-Fort Worth, in those districts, and secondarily in new nonattainment areas, San Antonio, Austin, Tyler-Longview -- oh, I should say in the first instance it also includes Beaumont-Port Arthur. It's a difficult uphill battle, but I think all of us are optimistic we can wrestle it down.

I, too, would like to make a few comments, and I was preempted to some extent by the unexpected resolution, and I appreciate that, Pete and Robert and Johnny.

This is, for me, a very special occasion and I wanted to take a little more time than usual on the front end of this, because there are so many friends and supporters in the room today.

Last month we held our commission meeting in El Paso, and I mentioned there that the visit had brought, for me, full circle the efforts that we had begun in connection with Texas border transportation challenges five years before, and I think with enormous success in terms of our Border Infrastructure Program.

Today, for me, holds even more significance, but I think it also holds some significance for the commission and for TxDOT. Five years ago, Governor Bush appointed me chair to the transportation commission and it's been a tremendous privilege. I stepped into the role of steering, and I think with the help of many of you here today, reshaping what I would characterize as an agency that in many ways -- at least as of five years ago -- had slipped its moorings and drifted off course.

We've covered quite a distance, I think, in the last five years: three legislative sessions, a seemingly infinite number of meetings and rules and minute orders and ribbon cuttings, and so forth and so forth, and travels to literally, I think, every nook and cranny of the state. In that regard, for a guy who grew up in Texas, who has a deep affection for this state, I have never had that affection with the depth of understanding that the last five years have afforded me.

And it has been a very activist five years, I believe. As I mentioned, three legislative sessions, Robert has been my partner for two of those sessions and Johnny for one; lots of fights -- always, always on the side of the righteous, of course --

(General laughter.)

MR. LANEY:  -- and to my good fortune, I think, or our good fortune, considerably more wins than losses. And then there have been frustrations all along the way that have bedeviled me and will continue to bedevil anybody who sits in this position. For someone as outspokenly hostile to bureaucracies as I am, frustration on my part was bound to be a normal day-to-day staple.

But there have been accomplishments along the way as well that I'm very proud of, accomplishments that I could not have achieved without the help of a number of folks in this room and a number of folks scattered throughout the state. There will be more than time enough to catalogue and celebrate whatever accomplishments have happened over the last five years.

I made a few comments, though, that I want to refer to at my first Transportation Conference in 1995 that focused on competition and performance, attempted to signal a new direction for the agency, and stirred up some level of controversy, and overlooked, among all the squawking and the flying feathers after those comments were made, I made this statement.

"Leadership, at its best, nurtures the highest and best aspirations of its organization and clears the path of obstacles that unnecessarily undermine the commitment and motivation of the organization's employees. I hope I can look back some years hence and say that I contributed in some small part to what you accomplish in the years to come."

Well, the first five of those years to come have now come and have gone, and looking back, it feels pretty good to be able to say with some level of confidence that I have contributed. And the reason for these curious and peculiar introductory comments today is that last year, following the legislative session, I told the Governor's Office that for a number of reasons I wanted to step down from this chairmanship in early 2000. As a result, this will be my last commission meeting as chair of the transportation commission.

At next month's commission meeting, appropriately in Houston, I will turn the gavel over to Johnny Johnson. I look forward very much to supporting Johnny, as both Robert and Johnny have so generously and effectively supported me. These are two extraordinary public servants, by the way, Johnny and Robert, whose judgment, intellect and commitment to Texas and transportation interests in Texas I have come to respect immensely.

Indulge me, though, for a second for a few thanks I need to pass around. First of all, riding shotgun for me during the last five years was my remarkably capable executive assistant, Mary Anne Griss. When I interviewed Mary Anne, I told her I didn't want a "yes man" -- and I'm sure she corrected me and said "yes person" --

(General laughter.)

MR. LANEY: I wanted somebody to challenge me, to disagree with me, to bring her own independent thought to bear on issues at hand, but ultimately to line up with me once a decision was made, however disagreeable. That wasn't always easy for Mary Anne, but Mary Anne has lived up to that commitment and has been the very best good soldier.

And in many cases, especially during the first two years when I was throwing elbows with aliens from the prior planet, Mary Anne was treated by many of her colleagues as if she had sidled up to Satan incarnate. It wasn't always easy and it wasn't always fun and it sure wasn't something she bargained for.

Mary Anne, my compliments and sincere gratitude for your assistance and your support.

And I can't fail to mention Karen Stone who has also shouldered extraordinary loads, with the sunniest of dispositions, for me and now for the other two commissioners, as well.

To those of you who have worked so closely with me during the last five years -- and there are a bunch of you in this room -- and those of you who have provided various types of support, directly and indirectly, I want to take this opportunity to thank you all.

And to those of you who think you're finally and forever done with me, think again. I am not hanging up the spurs until 2001; I expect to be here at least through the end of my term next February; and until then, those spurs, I hope, will be still sharp enough to draw blood.

(General laughter.)

MR. LANEY: It has been fun, it has been very challenging and always gratifying. And Johnny, I wish the very best of luck to you.

MR. JOHNSON: Thank you, David.

MR. LANEY: You can count on my support.

And finally, since my time with this gavel here is now extremely limited, let me take this opportunity to forewarn the delegations and anybody else with hutzpah enough to appear before us this morning that I will wield the gavel with casual and unaccustomed abandon for any of you who run afoul of the time constraints, and that, as a reminder, is 20 minutes for the delegations and 20 seconds for any elected official.

(General laughter.)

MR. LANEY: We have a very full slate of business today, including four delegations, so let's go ahead and begin.

BELL COUNTY

(Mayor Fred Latham, Senator Troy Fraser, Rep. Dianne Delisi, Judge Jon Burrows, Major General Colby Broadwater)

MR. LANEY: First of all, delegation number

one, from Bell County, the City of Killeen will start us off. Mayor Fred Latham will present this item, and welcome, mayor, glad to have you here.

MAYOR LATHAM: Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. Mr. Nichols and Mr. Johnson, we do appreciate the public service that you offer to this state, and each one of us is affected every day by the work that you do and your body of work is tremendous.

I'd like to thank you first for the opportunity to come before the commission to talk to you about our joint use airport project at Fort Hood's Robert Gray Army Airfield. This is a very important intermodal transportation project involving both highway and air transportation elements and your support today -- in the future is extremely important.

MR. LANEY: Mayor, let me interrupt you for a second. You're elected, aren't you?

MAYOR LATHAM: I'm the mayor of Killeen, yes, sir.

(Rapped gavel and general laughter.)

MAYOR LATHAM: But I'm in the 20-minute section.

This is a regional project and we want to show you that it benefits many Central Texans and Texas citizens. In fact, there's over 500,000 people that live within one-hour's driving time to this new site.

To show you the strength of the regionalization that we're going to bring you today, I'd like to introduce some of our members today, who some of them will be speaking and some are here to support the project.

The very first -- and I'd like these people to please stand as I recognize them -- Senator Troy Fraser who will speak a little bit later; Representative Dianne Delisi who will also speak later; Representative David Lengefeld; Jody Withers, representing Representative Suzanna Hupp; our county judge, Judge Jon Burrows who will speak later; the deputy commander of III Corps in Fort Hood, Major General Colby Broadwater, an important partner who will also speak later.

We have Mr. Otis Welch who is the manager for the Texas Airports Development Office of the FAA Southwest Region in Fort Worth. We have the mayor of Harker Heights, Mary Gauer; the mayor of Belton, Bill Holmes. We have superintendents from the Killeen School District; we have chamber of commerce executives; we have Mayor Robert Stluka from Round Rock; we have many of the council members from the City of Killeen.

And just to show you from the other communities, if anybody is here from the Central Texas delegation for Killeen, would you please stand up for just one minute. We have Bell County commissioners. This is an array of people that come from all walks of life, and I think they are proof positive that this is a regional effort on our part.

I'd like to now call upon Senator Troy Fraser who will give you some comments.

SENATOR FRASER: Commissioners. David, when Pete was making the presentation, he asked you to step down. I didn't realize it was almost literally.

(General laughter.)

SENATOR FRASER: We appreciate your service. And, you know, I told Johnny before we started and we were commenting on the fact that you touch every person's life in the state of Texas. We've spoiled the people of the state of Texas by giving them good roads for years, and they're accustomed to that.

And I was thinking, before coming up here, that I'll be coming saying "It's me again" because we have so many projects that we're working on. I thank you for your help on Interstate 35, you know, to where it looks like we're getting to where we want to be on that. We've got the 195 project that you have done everything we've asked and it's proceeding along. Wes, I'd asked the help last year on the deployment route issue, and then today we're here with the Robert Gray issue.

And it's become very evident to me as chairman of the redistricting committee, looking at the growth of the state, we've grown 20 percent last year in Texas; we've grown faster than almost any other state in the union, and in that growth, I want to make sure we bring up the fact that this area that we're talking about is the fourth largest growing area of the state. We've got a unique area that is growing very fast and a lot of the reason it's growing is the fact that we have the largest military installation in the free world there, and a lot of this activity has been revolving around that fact.

One of the things you're going to hear today, we're going to be coming to you to ask for the help on this partnership. We have six counties that have joined in; you're going to see all the communities in the area that have all endorsed it; you've got all the elected officials that have endorsed it.

It's a partnership that we're putting forward, but we need TxDOT to be a partner also. We need roads to be put in so that we can get these passengers to this airfield. This is going to be a great asset to the people of Central Texas.

I'm going to be back up in a second to wrap things up, but the thing you're going to hear today is that all these projects we're working on, the 195 project, the deployment route, and the Robert Gray, we're actually killing three birds with one stone with this project, because this dollar helps with every one of those projects, and you'll hear that.

So this is a good one. We're hoping to have your help.

Robert, we thank you so much for coming in and letting us show it to you, and you and Kirby coming in, and we hope that we can make a good case and at the end of the day you agree that this is a project that needs to be funded.

Thanks much, and I would ask State Representative Dianne Delisi to please offer some comments.

REP. DELISI: Thank you, Senator.

Good morning, commissioners. Mr. Chairman, I thank you personally for the good work that you have done for the people of the state of Texas. We will miss you.

Thank you, Commissioner Nichols. I know on three hours sleep you were able to make the meeting in Killeen, and we're very grateful.

And for our new chairman, Commissioner Johnson, I ask your interest in the project that we present today.

I was thinking, as I inched my way down this morning, down I-35, through the beloved Pflugerville squeeze --

MR. LANEY: Did you inch it at 85 miles an hour?

(General laughter.)

REP. DELISI: As long as DPS is not here, sir.

And that particular portion from Pflugerville down to my office took 50 minutes this morning between about 7:30 and 8:30. I contrast that with a flight that brought me from Charlottesville, Virginia, back to the Killeen airport Sunday evening, and after the plane landed in Killeen, I was back at my kitchen table with a cup of tea reading my mail 25 minutes after the plane landed.

Now, we have some enormous challenges before us in Texas, and as a member of Appropriations, I'm acutely aware that our Texas demographer will be correct in showing that Texas will have 20 million citizens this year 2000. And sometimes we feel in Central Texas that we're really contributing to that, because I live in one of the fastest growing MSAs in the state.

So I am here today to thank you for your vision for realizing that for 97 miles on I-35 you will spend a billion-plus dollars. Contrast that with your priority now for alternative ways to move populations in Texas and I applaud you, particularly for your air traffic plan.

We have before us a unique partnership: the Department of Defense, the state of Texas, and municipalities to come together and meet the needs of Central Texans. We're very proud to have as our neighbor one-fifth of the total population of the Army that's on the planet, two full divisions. And so knowing all that, the economic infrastructure that's important to our fast-growing area, certainly our commitment to the military and for their deployment, but also for our quality of life, it's extremely important that you give priority consideration to this joint effort.

We need the infrastructure that's going to be necessary for this airport, and so I now present to you a video telling a little bit more about this project and our life in Central Texas. Thank you.

(Whereupon, the video was shown.)

MAYOR LATHAM: It is a smart move. As the video highlighted, Killeen and the region have experienced phenomenal growth during the past few years. This has also been the major reason why our airline passenger growth has done what it has done. Our air passenger enplanements have increased from about 25,000 people in 1981 to over 90,000 in 1999.

Killeen is served by three different airlines; we have 34 flights a day that go to either DFW Airport or to Houston Intercontinental Airport.

To better serve our growing community, we need to provide an airport with a longer runway, a larger terminal building, and a site with room to grow. Joint use at Robert Gray does that; it's a win-win.

Joint use is an opportunity to share the resources with our good neighbor Fort Hood and to get the use of a longer runway, a control tower, and many other important resources that are benefits to passengers in the form of safety. We will share the costs, which will benefit both the city and Fort Hood.

Joint use is not a new concept. There are over 16 different Department of Defense joint use airfields. Longstanding agreements have taken place at Elgin Air Force Base in Florida, Scott Air Force Base in Illinois, Charleston Air Force Base in South Carolina, and Shepard Air Force Base in Wichita Falls, Texas.

Roadway development is a key element of this project. The upgrading of Clear Creek and construction of new Airport Road will provide easy access to the terminal site for airline travelers. The roadway segment involves just over six miles of roadway construction.

A recently completed economic impact study conducted by the Perryman Group, and funded by many of these same communities that are represented here today supporting the project, shows the economic impact of this project to be far-reaching and significant, not only for Central Texas but for the state of Texas as well.

I'd like to call on Judge Jon Burrows to comment.

JUDGE BURROWS: Thank you, Mayor Latham.

This is an important project for Bell County. The county has been an active supporter of Robert Gray Army Airfield joint use from the beginning, but not only is it an important project for Bell County, it's an important project for the region. Sixteen cities and five counties have passed resolutions in support.

Over 500,000 citizens will be able to get to this new airport in less than an hour driving time; 330,000 of those live in Bell and Coryell counties and are within a half hour driving time.

At the meeting on March 8, attended by Commissioner Nichols, among the over 70 people present were a state senator, two state representatives, two county judges, eight county commissioners, seven mayors, one mayor pro tem, and nine city council members. These busy people took time out of their schedules to show their support of this project and many of them are again with us here today. They have recognized the unique opportunity that presents itself not only for customer service but also for economic development for the region.

Thomas Jefferson once said, I am a great believer in luck and I find the harder I work, the more I have of it. New Federal Aviation funding has become available in just the last few days. Perhaps the City of Killeen has been lucky in their timing -- perhaps -- but they have also worked very hard to put together and bring to you a project for which the time is right.

This project will give the solider at Fort Hood, the retiree at Sun City and the businessman at Temple better airline service. It will enhance roads that can be used for alternative deployment routes for the movement of military equipment to the coastal ports. The new facility will be able to handle the new regional jets that will be phased in in the future and allow for expanded air service as the region grows -- and it will grow.

Gray Army Airfield brings a 10,000 foot runway, one that's approved for the space shuttle to land on; it brings a control tower and emergency response capability at the level of a major airport, plus many other benefits.

This is a project that Bell County needs but it is also a project that Coryell County, Williamson County, Lampasas County and Burnet County need too. These five counties and 16 of their cities believe in this project. I urge you to support the roadway construction associated with it.

To paraphrase a great philosopher that most of us would be of age to remember, Pogo: We are confronted here with almost insurmountable opportunities. With your help, we look forward to dealing with those opportunities.

And now Major General Colby Broadwater, the Deputy Commanding General of III Corps at Fort Hood, will speak about the joint use project.

MAJOR BROADWATER: Good morning, sir.

Let me just put Fort Hood's position right up front. Joint use is a project that we strongly support. Why do we do that? Fort Hood is an enduring installation for the Department of Defense. You've heard how large the size is: 42,000 soldiers, 75,000 dependents, and a number of retirees that live there in the area.

Having a joint use facility airfield at Robert Gray will only enhance that stability in that part of the state of Texas, and its ability as a power projection platform for our defense of the free world.

Our soldiers depend daily on commercial and military traffic to get in and out, both official and recreational travel. This new facility will not only provide better opportunities for the soldiers and their families but for everyone else in the area as well.

The new roadway improvements that we're talking about today to get people in and out of the airfield are also important to Fort Hood. Improving Clear Creek Road and the new Airport Road, coupled with your ongoing improvements with 195, will only make a safer and much better route for our soldiers.

To demonstrate Fort Hood's commitment, we are providing 75 percent of the right of way required for the new Airport Road upgrades. We need Airport Road and Clear Creek Road for additional deployment routes so that we can get to the ports of Texas to support any national contingencies. These routes will provide more direct access to those ports.

I would like to thank you, all of you, for giving me the opportunity to give Fort Hood's position this morning. It is important to us; it's important, we feel, to the communities that surround us that we feel like we're part of.

Again, thank you, sir, for allowing me to speak, and I'll be followed by Senator Fraser for a wrap-up.

SENATOR FRASER: I feel like the presentation probably speaks for itself. This is a project that should happen, and as I said earlier, I think the case can easily be made that we're covering several different projects at one time, that not only are we doing something that is very important for Fort Hood and the national defense of the country, but also those soldiers -- one of the points that wasn't made is the fact that those soldiers today, a lot of times they have to leave their luggage behind and send it on a secondary flight, because the runways are so short on the airport that they can't even take their luggage with them.

As a pilot flying in there, there's a lot of other safety considerations that the new airport will give us that make this very, very important.

This project, I believe, is projected to cost approximately $12.7 million that we're asking from TxDOT. We're making that appeal to you, because we feel like that is money well spent; it will be money invested in the infrastructure, I think in lines with the goals, Robert, that we're trying to do. Relieving those routes, we not only solve the problem with the airport issue but it will aid us in the deployment routes for Fort Hood, and also will give us a routing into 195.

Any questions about anything or anything we have not covered?

MR. LANEY: We may have some in a minute or two. We've got a couple of other speakers following you on the same issue, if you can just stay put for a second.

SENATOR FRASER: I'm sorry. I do have a letter that I needed to read from Senator Ogden. Senator Ogden has sent a letter saying: "I strongly support the efforts to expedite completion of Highway 195 improvements between Killeen and Interstate 35. These improvements will save lives, make an important contribution to the national defense." He is very aware of this project, endorses the project, and this goes up through -- he has the district right above me that would be the continuation of that, and they're also one of the counties that has endorsed this project, so he wanted to make sure that you knew that he was fully endorsing it also.

MR. LANEY: Thank you, Senator.

We've got a couple of other folks intending to speak with respect to this Item 1(a), I believe in favor of it. Jody Withers has provided us with a card, and if you'd like to come speak on behalf of your representative. For the record, you might want to introduce yourself.

MR. WITHERS: Thank you. I'm Jody Withers; I'm the legislative director for State Representative Suzanna Gratia Hupp. She was unable to make it into Austin this morning from Lampasas, but she wanted me to enter a very brief statement into the record concerning this project.

"I've attended several meetings, briefings and tours concerning this project. I have personally discussed this issue at length with several local officials. I wholeheartedly support the joint use proposal for Robert Gray Army Airfield. This joint use agreement continues a long-standing practice of cooperation between state, local and federal officials. No one can question the positive economic impact that Fort Hood has on the local economy of Central Texas and the state of Texas.

"The improvements made to the infrastructure surrounding Robert Gray Army Airfield will continue to send a strong message to the Pentagon and the U.S. Congress that Texas is proud to host the largest and most important military installation in the United States. Therefore, I request and urge the transportation commission to accept and approve the funding request made by the City of Killeen for this very important project."

Thank you for your time.

MR. LANEY: Thank you, Mr. Withers.

BELL COUNTY

(William Jones III, Central Texas Regional Airport Committee)

MR. LANEY: There are always -- there are at least often two sides to a coin, I believe, and we have Mr. Bill Jones who will make a presentation with respect to the other side of this coin. Mr. Jones, representing the Central Texas Regional Airport Committee.

MR. JONES: Good morning, everyone. Chairman Laney, members of the commission, members of the legislature, and fellow Texas citizens. Thank you for the opportunity to address the commission today. My name is Williams Jones III. I'm at 3606 Oak Villa Drive in Temple, Texas; I have a manufacturing company in the city of Temple and we employ about 200 people within the city of Temple.

I'm here today to speak in opposition to the funding request by the City of Killeen for the money to build highways leading to the Gray Army Airfield on Fort Hood. I represent the Central Texas Regional Airport Committee, a group of Central Texas citizens that oppose the wasteful spending of the tax dollars to build an airport that does not need to exist for commercial use.

I know that it is a highway funding request meeting that we're here today on; however, the issue that we are concerned about relates to the spending of citizens' taxpayer dollars that are required for this project. The request for funding from the Department of Transportation is a major part of the funding but it is not all of the funding.

Our committee has been in existence since early this year. The need for our committee arose from the fact that the cost of the Gray joint use project rose from $25 million to about $50 million over about an 18-month period of time. The publicized price tag has stopped rising since our group became public.

We began by researching the possible option of using the Draughon-Miller Central Texas Regional Airport in Temple, Texas. I'm a pilot and have made hundreds of takeoffs and landings from the Draughon-Miller Airport beginning in 1976. I knew of the excellent facilities that were there. What we had to learn was what would it take to get the airport ready to serve three airlines and the 100,000-plus boardings that would be seen in the first year or so of operation.

We'd received preliminary costs for our facility upgrade just by using the figures that were gathered for the Killeen installation. The only missing pieces that it takes to make the Temple airport ready for commercial airport use is an increased terminal and parking.

The basis for our objection is that there is a very viable alternative to the airport that the City of Killeen proposes to be built as part of the Gray Army Airfield, an airfield that is on the far side of Bell County, that alternative is the Draughon-Miller Central Texas Regional Airport.

Draughon-Miller is a 922-acre airport that has served commercial airlines in the past and is currently FAR Part 139 certified for commercial airline service. It has a 6,300-foot by 150-foot wide runway that is more than adequate to serve the regional jets that will be flown by the regional carriers in the next couple of years. The information packet that I've provided to you previously and this morning outlines the current facilities at the Draughon-Miller Airport. The needs of the airport to serve the three airlines today are an expanded terminal and parking.

I have spoken to Ambrier and Bombardier, the manufacturers of the aircraft that will be flown into Central Texas in the next couple of years. The performance data on the aircraft at a maximum passenger loading at an ISA, international standard atmosphere, plus 20 degrees Celsius -- what that means is a 95-degree day -- for a flight of 100 nautical miles -- that's the distance between either Houston Intercontinental or Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport, a hold of 30 minutes at 5,000 feet, an alternate airport landing site of 100 nautical miles away plus a 45-minute reserve, requires approximately 6,000 feet of runway, and again, the runway at Temple Draughon-Miller is 6,300 feet.

There are a half a million citizens located in Central Texas within a 40-minute drive of Draughon-Miller. The location of the airport is 4.3 miles from Interstate 35, on State Highway 36 and Highway 317. The highway infrastructure is in place; the airport is in place; the location is in the heart of Central Texas on the major arteries of the region.

According to airport consultants that we've used that have provided cost information to us to make the airport ready to serve the airlines, it will be close to $12 million total cost. There is a savings of approximately $40 million. These are simply the costs to make the airfield ready for use.

The future cost in having three airports in Bell County will be the long-term cost to the taxpayers. Killeen Airport that currently serves the airlines today will remain in existence, open to general aviation traffic, because the Gray Airport will be restricted to aircraft in excess of 12,500 pounds. Draughon-Miller has been in existence for over 50 years and serves the industrial and medical community of our region and all of the Central Texas region today. It will remain in existence, and in fact, is being considered for expanded commercial uses by several potential occupants in addition to the commercial airlines.

While Central Texas is no Dallas-Fort Worth, we think it's a good analogy to look how the DFW Airport location in relationship to Dallas and Fort Worth and that general region. DFW is in the middle of the population base. Ultimately, we believe that the airlines will be interested in serving all of Central Texas from one regional airport. It will make sense for the half a million citizens from Waco to Georgetown, Cameron to Gatesville, Valley Mills to Copperas Cove to be served from one regional airport. All of these communities are within that 40 minutes from the Draughon-Miller Airport.

Killeen has come to you with the fact that they have support from many communities, chambers and counties in the area, including the City of Temple. The support was initially gathered when the cost of the project was proposed to be much lower than the current price tag.

Unfortunately, these cities were not presented with an alternative since the price tag has increased. Their citizens will only have to pay for the airport from their tax dollars that go to Austin and Washington. We are intending to present this case for their benefit as well as ours today. Many do not know what exists in Temple in the Temple Draughon-Miller Central Texas Regional Airport.

At a recent visit to the FAA, they informed us that one of the reasons the Army was interested in this today, besides the need for the troops, is the fact that they'll now be able to tap into alternate funding sources that have not previously been available to them. This airport is an important airfield for the Army, but if the improvements are needed for this airport, it should come from the military budget, not from the civilian budgets. Dollars are short, as we all know and as you mentioned here this morning.

I am for a strong military; I'm a veteran of the United States Army; we are very fortunate to have Fort Hood in Central Texas, just 30 minutes away from the Draughon-Miller Airport. The distance between the two cities is really not a significant issue to argue either way, for either one of the two airports. The issue is the cost to build the Gray joint use facility and the fact that there is an alternate airport that exists in Central Texas, convenient to all locations.

As the stewards of the limited tax dollars, I know you will look at the request and take very seriously the request and the options that are presented and the fact that there are many, many requests for the limited dollars that are available to us today for highways, as well as the knowledge that tax dollars are limited for all projects in this country.

The issue is that there is a request to build highways to an airport that does not need to exist for commercial traffic. The building of this airport will simply increase the amount of wasteful spending that there is too much of today in our country. Using an airport that exists will serve the needs of the greatest number of Texas citizens and taxpayers for decades to come and can save over $30 million in the very near future. It can also be ready to use at least two years sooner than the proposed Gray Army air facility.

In contacting the airlines in the recent past, one airline said they will be ready to fly an all-jet fleet within two years. The proposal at Gray is proposed to be able to begin operations, at the earliest, in 2004. The airlines will need someplace to go even before that time. Temple can be such a facility that will be ready to serve those airlines.

For all of the taxpayers of Texas, I respectfully request that the funding for the highways to reach Gary Army Airfield be denied. Your decision can set in motion a savings of well over $30 million.

If I may answer any questions for you, I would be glad to do so, and I hope that as you investigate the need for this project, you will come to Temple and see the excellent airport facility that we have there. I know that airport manager Sharon Rostovich will be happy to give you a personal tour and show you what a great facility we have.

Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak before you today, gentlemen.

MR. LANEY: Thank you, Mr. Jones. Rather than walk all the way back to your seat, you might want to stay a little closer, because we may have some questions if you want to stand over in the wings for a second.

MR. JONES: All right, sir. Thank you very much for this opportunity.

MR. LANEY: We might not have some questions; we'll see. Robert, you were the one to visit on our behalf?

MR. NICHOLS: Yes. I was going to ask him a couple of questions.

MR. LANEY: Sorry.

MR. NICHOLS: While you're still standing right there, first of all, I'd like to thank you for expressing your opinion. You have done a good job of putting your information together; there's a lot of facts and figures, and anyone who is interested in saving the government money, we appreciate your ideas and considerations.

On this committee, Central Texas Regional Airport Committee, normally when I think of a committee like that, I'm thinking, especially since it's regional, that it was put together or appointed by a process through the commissioners courts or city councils or something of that nature. Were you established by any process like that, or did citizens just get together and do it?

MR. JONES: No, sir. We took it upon ourselves to begin the research to determine if the Temple Draughon-Miller Airport was even a viable alternative to serve the needs of Central Texas. Again, as I indicated, I've flown out of there for a long time so I knew of its capabilities, but as far as its capability of serving the regional needs, the population, the use of air traffic and that for all of Central Texas, it was a small group of citizens and it's grown.

We don't have membership cards, we don't have regular meetings or anything of that nature, but we have a web site at regionalairport.com, and we've received many, many comments. The vast majority have been very positive for the support of the Draughon-Miller Airport. So that basically is our committee.

MR. NICHOLS: I came up through city council and mayor and understand local politics, I guess, also, but -- and I was in the manufacturing business too -- but in your committee, in dealing with the local officials, your city councils, your neighboring city councils, the commissioners court, stuff like that, if your information is so overwhelming that it's not necessary and would save money, why are they reaching a different conclusion, or have you persuaded -- or your committee, with these facts, persuaded any of the councils or any of the commissioners courts or any of your state elected officials to change their position?

MR. JONES: I do not know that we have changed a single mind relative to those that have previously supported this.

MR. NICHOLS: Have you made presentations to these commissioners courts or city councils?

MR. JONES: No, sir. We had a citizens town hall meeting in which our county commissioner

appeared -- the county judge appeared -- I'm sorry -- and a number of our county commissioners appeared, they heard us. They've certainly taken no action relative to our group. And we have made presentations before the Temple City Council.

MR. NICHOLS: That's all the questions I have; I have some comments later, but there may be some other questions.

MR. LANEY: Johnny?

MR. JOHNSON: I had a couple of observations and questions. Does Draughon-Miller currently have commercial traffic?

MR. JONES: It does not today, no.

MR. JOHNSON: Has it ever had commercial traffic?

MR. JONES: Yes, sir, it has.

MR. JOHNSON: Does Waco currently have commercial traffic?

MR. JONES: It currently has commercial traffic; it's served by two airlines; one airline pulled out as of January 1 out of Waco.

MR. JOHNSON: And two remain?

MR. JONES: Yes, sir, that's correct.

MR. LANEY: And at Killeen, three serve?

MR. JONES: That is correct, sir.

MR. JOHNSON: I'm interpreting some of your remarks to indicate to me that you're a pilot?

MR. JONES: Yes, that's correct.

MR. JOHNSON: You have 6,300 feet at Draughon-Miller and at Robert Gray I think there's 9,100, or thereabouts.

MR. JONES: Ten thousand.

MR. JOHNSON: Ten thousand. As a pilot, in an emergency situation, wouldn't you rather have the longer runway?

MR. JONES: I don't think there's a pilot in the world that will tell you that 10,000 isn't enough when he's in trouble.

MR. JOHNSON: I agree.

MR. JONES: As was found out in the last couple of weeks in Killeen.

MR. JOHNSON: And I think you've done a marvelous job of presenting a very sound financial case, and I want to salute you for your efforts that you've made. You've presented some very poignant reasons.

MR. JONES: Thank you for the opportunity to address the commission and answer the questions. Thank you, gentlemen.

MR. LANEY: Appreciate it, Mr. Jones.

Robert, you said you had some comments?

MR. NICHOLS: Yes, I had some more comments.

I was fortunate enough, and they were kind enough to give me a personal tour of the area and go through the pros and cons that you went through in your analysis, trying to determine whether it made more sense to expand the existing airport or work with the military and have a joint use.

Short term -- this is just my personal opinion and observation was that short term it looked like it would be cheaper to go the other route, but when you think long term -- and that's the way I think most of us need to look -- 20 years, 30 years down the run, you're dealing with a half million population now, but you're going to be dealing with a million population later, and what would the correct decision be today that would affect in a positive manner the future, and it looked to me like the steps that you had gone through in your analysis were correct for many reasons: the length, the weight of that runway -- your 100,000 capacity airport versus a much lighter weight plane -- and it leaves an option open for the future for the type of vehicles and planes and stuff you could bring in there, plus have your emergency management.

I think you were a level 5 at the military base, and that's almost unheard of at most. And for safety -- airplane wrecks, crashes, things of that nature that we don't like to get involved in -- when we're talking about emergency, if you know you're going to have a problem when you land, you're going to try to pick an airport where the safety provisions are there, and the military has that available now. So it would be a reserve safety thing.

There is a long list of reasons which I'm not going to rattle off, but I can tell you I was very much impressed that the direction you were heading was the correct direction and very supportive of it for a long list of reasons -- which I'm not going to sit here and go through.

I think from a transportation funding process, I'm hoping that -- I know our district engineer is here. We discussed when we were there the local area has already advanced some of the planning on this process, as I understood it, with their own funds, so they are using their own funds to advance engineering, things of that nature, but we do not have a control number at this point. We need to get, just for record keeping, that process.

MR. SKOPIK: Yes, sir. At this point in time, the City of Killeen is completely on their own in the development of this project. They chose that route 12 to 18 months ago to completely develop the project on their own. They asked for our assistance, TxDOT's assistance. We immediately put our staff together to assist them and work very closely with them in the hopes that they would be able to then come to us in a formal way to request funding once they had done their homework and really gotten behind what their needs were in terms of roadway infrastructure.

So yes, right now the proposal they're bringing to us, that they're putting on the table, to me is quite significant. When you're talking about a leveraging type of proposal, their proposal, as outlined in your documents, is 100 percent of all the preliminary engineering and design engineering that's required for this project, from the very beginning of the scope of the project, to public involvement, to environmental mitigation, to PS&E, to 100 percent of the right of way and utility costs that they're bringing to the table.

In addition to not only the right of way for the infrastructure that's being proposed -- a four-lane highway on one leg and two-lane on the other -- the two-lane portion, they're acquiring the right of way and all the public involvement and design work is completely clear for an ultimate four-lane facility, that future approach.

MR. NICHOLS: Is the proper designation a DCIS number?

MR. SKOPIK: Yes.

MR. NICHOLS: So we do have one now?

MR. SKOPIK: A CSJ probably is what you're talking about.

MR. NICHOLS: A CSJ?

MR. SKOPIK: A CSJ.

MR. NICHOLS: We do have one now, or we're working toward one?

MR. SKOPIK: We're working towards one as far as just a planning CSJ, but right now we do not have any commitment on the part of TxDOT as far as funding the project.

MR. NICHOLS: Okay. But they have been stepping forward to the plate and advancing the project at their expense, but in collaboration or with making sure it fits state standards and all that kind of stuff.

MR. SKOPIK: Right, both federal and state standards.

MR. NICHOLS: The State Transportation Plan which is the 20-year plan for the state, has a very strong emphasis on multimodal, the State Highway System, not only supporting the traveling public by roads but by connectivity with airports, seaports, rail, all these other things, so it certainly fits in the development of a regional airport -- which is what you're talking about doing -- in the state's master plan. I've rambled on enough.

MR. LANEY: Johnny, any comments?

MR. JOHNSON: A question. Commissioner Nichols indicated that he was a mayor which I assume was an elected position. Is he affected by the 20-second rule?

(General laughter.)

MR. NICHOLS: Former mayor, small town.

MR. LANEY: He's exempted.

I've got a question. I don't know who to ask this of, so you can tell me who you want to answer it. Assume a Gulf War type situation and there's basically a fairly active projection of that two-divisional force out of the Bell County area to wherever, is private commercial traffic just preempted during the operations? Is it halted?

MAYOR LATHAM: I'll let the commanding general of Fort Hood to answer the question.

MR. LANEY: Great.

MAJOR BROADWATER: I'm only the deputy commanding general.

MR. LANEY: You're in trouble now.

(General laughter.)

MAJOR BROADWATER: Sir, to answer your question, heretofore, that has not happened. Take Charleston Air Force Base where massive deployments, both for the Gulf War and other contingencies, that is a commercial facility on one side, the air base on the other.

The proposed joint use here basically has Fort Hood using the west side of the airfield, the runway being joint use, and the east or the left side being for the commercial airport and parking and the stuff that you saw briefed today. That runway can handle multiple takeoffs and landings all day long.

On our side, we are currently upgrading to a capacity of seven wide-body aircraft for mobilization of forces, but that's on the west side of the runway; it would have nothing to do with the commercial side. By all previous experience, there has not been a stoppage of commercial traffic, to answer your question.

MR. LANEY: While you're at the dais, let me ask another question, just sort of point blank. There have been in the past a number of base closures and consolidations and so forth. We do not want that to happen in Bell County, needless to say. Does this joint operation help provide some potential protection against any future base closure and consolidation, even partial base closure and consolidation?

MAJOR BROADWATER: Yes, sir, and in my prepared remarks I think I used the word stability, and the investment that Texas has made to Fort Hood has certainly helped to keep Fort Hood healthy, has brought a second division back to Fort Hood here a number of years ago when the Army went from 18 to 10 divisions, and Fort Hood has been designated as an enduring installation. This only enhances our position when you get into those type of discussions.

MR. LANEY: Do you envision Fort Hood growing?

MAJOR BROADWATER: Sir, I currently do not envision Fort Hood growing. The Army is in a steady state for the foreseeable future with a number of soldiers that we currently have serving in uniform, and I, from my position, see the Army keeping that state for a number of years.

MR. LANEY: Thank you. And we'll strike from the record the fact that you usurped your commander's authority here.

(General laughter.)

MAJOR BROADWATER: He asked me to come represent him today, sir; he couldn't be here. Thank you.

MR. LANEY: Any other comments or questions?

I've got a couple of comments. I think it's rare and laudable that we're looking at a joint operation of civilian and military. I think it's a terrific opportunity for Texas and for that region of Texas.

I am concerned a little about some of the questions raised by Mr. Jones, from an economic standpoint, but I have a feeling once we have a chance to take a look at it, we're going to see a balance in favor of the stability that we just referred to, as well as mobility on the military as well as on the civilian side. The presentation was terrific. Thank you all very much.

As you know, we don't make decisions on issues like this as they're presented. We will take this back. This is a subject for potential funding -- if we decide to go forward with it -- strategic priority funding which is a late summer/early fall kind of issue, and I think it will be scrubbed pretty hard and pretty carefully, and we'll take a look at it between now and then and have a response.

I, for one find it -- potentially, subject again to Mr. Jones concerns that he raised -- a very attractive project with a lot of thought put into it, and clearly a lot of leverage to our dollars which is something that I find very attractive. We appreciate all the effort that was put into it; we also appreciate the invitations to join you all for the tour and presentation. I think our executive assistants made it, but of the commissioners, only Robert made it, and I appreciate you making the effort to go there. I think it was very helpful for all three of us.

If there aren't any further questions, I was reminded of one thing. I know you might have usurped your commander's authority and gotten in trouble and may be demoted, but you're not nearly the trouble that I'm in because in my presentation and my remarks earlier, I overlooked one essential fact, and that is -- and I want to take a minute to identify and recognize the one person who has sifted through the last five years of my absence from home, and that's my better half who is making her first appearance at a commission meeting this morning, Eleanor Laney back there in the back. Thanks for joining us this morning.

(Applause.)

MR. LANEY: Now, we have a lot of folks from Bell County in here and we've got another delegation probably in the wings about to come in. We're going to recess for let's say five minutes. Five minutes is not a lot of time to move out and move folks in, but we're under a relatively pressed scheduled, so if I can get you all to go ahead and move on out of the building fairly efficiently. We're in recess for five minutes. Thanks.

(Whereupon, a brief recess was taken.)

LUBBOCK COUNTY

(Randy Neugebauer, Alan Henry, Senator Robert Duncan)

MR. LANEY: I'd like to reconvene the meeting of the transportation commission. First of all, I'd like to recognize a delegation here who is not going to be speaking but who is here, I guess, in presence and to make sure that the member to your left, Mr. Nichols, behaves himself, and that's a delegation from Jacksonville, because it's Jacksonville Day today. And those of you in the back, I believe, from Jacksonville, there you are. Great. It's the entire population of Jacksonville.

(General laughter.)

MR. LANEY: We're glad to have you here, and Robert has been behaving himself.

Our next delegation has made the trip probably yesterday afternoon or yesterday evening from Lubbock. I was in Lubbock earlier this week and had a delightful visit, very positive visit on a number of issues, some of which I expect we'll hear about today.

Alan Henry from the Lubbock Chamber of Commerce will lead the presentation, and Mr. Henry -- or Randy Neugebauer will lead the presentation. Sorry. I've got the wrong information. Glad to have you back.

MR. NEUGEBAUER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It was a pleasure having you and Wes out in Lubbock earlier this week.

Just before we get started, I had an opportunity to testify this week, as you know, before the Senate State Affairs Committee talking about transportation and the importance of our state and how we need to make it a major emphasis. One of the comments I had an opportunity to make, and meant, and wanted to repeat today was that under your leadership, with Commissioners Nichols and Johnson, we have made tremendous strides on transportation in Texas and commend you and to tell you how much we appreciate your leadership.

I was getting a little nervous there when you were talking. I thought you were leaving, but I'm glad to know that you're going to stay on, and again, appreciate your service. And Commissioner Johnson, I know that you'll do a good job. You've got some pretty big shoes to follow, as you and Mr. Nichols have done outstanding.

MR. LANEY: Appreciate the comments, but I know you were hoping that I was leaving, number one, and I'm here to remind you that delegations have 20 minutes and elected representatives have 20 seconds.

(General laughter.)

MR. NEUGEBAUER: Yes, sir. And I've got some really good news for you because I'm not going to use my full 20 minutes. In fact, I just started to say if you'd accept a motion from the floor for a minute order, we could just skip the presentation. I don't think you're going to probably do that, so I'm going to go ahead with the presentation.

MR. LANEY: Appreciate your comments, Randy.

MR. NEUGEBAUER: It is a pleasure for us to be here and we want to bring back to you an update on a very important project in Lubbock, one that I know you're familiar with, and so we're not going to go through a lot of history on this project, but to really give you an update on where we are on the East-West Freeway.

I think the good news is that we have accumulated about 182 parcels of the right of way; we've spent about $43 million in right of way acquisition; and to date, with your help and going around and dipping in as many cookie jars as we could, we've been able to accumulate about $73 million for this project.

This is kind of a summary of the funding that we have accumulated up to this point. I think the important thing to mention here is that for two years in a row, the Lubbock MPO has committed all of their 4B mobility money to East-West Freeway, the district engineer, Carl Utley, working with our MPO -- we have an excellent working relationship -- using some district discretionary money of $7.8 million.

The commission obviously has helped us with nearly $30 million and we went to the U.S. Congress during the TEA-21 reauthorization and were able to get $20 million. So we feel like we're making a lot of progress, and this is another step in that.

What we wanted to kind of show you right now is this map kind of indicates what we have funded and where we are. As you remember, the first project we came to you was over at Loop 289 on the west side and the termination of the East-West Freeway to the west to begin to get the loop ready to receive the East-West Freeway and the interchange there. Then, we went back downtown and began our westward movement and came through Fourth Street.

Last year, Chancellor Montford and we came and talked to you about making sure that we got through the Texas Tech campus as expeditedly as we could, and you were kind enough to help us with that. And, now we're talking about a leg that is going to move from the western part of the campus through one of the largest traffic generation areas in our city and where some of our major employers are.

MR. LANEY: Let me interrupt here. Looking at that map, where, roughly, is the Texas Tech campus, using those letters on there?

MR. NEUGEBAUER: It's at C.

MR. LANEY: C, okay.

MR. NEUGEBAUER: Yes, sir.

With me today is former Mayor Alan Henry and also now the acting chairman of the Lubbock Chamber of Commerce, and Alan wants to just give you brief remarks on the importance of this project to the business community. Mayor Henry.

MAYOR HENRY: Thank you, Randy, and let me, once again, mention that I am a former mayor so I fall under the 20-minute guideline.

(General laughter.)

MAYOR HENRY: Commissioner Laney, Commissioner Nichols, Commissioner Johnson, and Mr. Heald, we thank you very much for allowing us to be here today.

Before I begin, I'd like to recognize the people from Lubbock who have come. We thank them very much. We have a delegation including the county commissioner, and certainly Senator Robert Duncan, and we appreciate all of them who are here on the front rows, because this is a very important position for our community.

And while I'm mentioning this, I also want to thank you for making July your meeting in Lubbock. We look forward to seeing you there and hosting you there in just a very little time.

You know, Lubbock has been working on an east-west project for almost 60 years. In 1943, the city plan of Lubbock included an east-west freeway; in 1964, the Lubbock Urban Transportation Plan called for the development of this route as a freeway; and I personally appeared before another commission very similar to this, as mayor, almost 20 years ago.

Now we've developed a very realistic plan -- which you have helped us a very, very great deal to develop -- and with this plan, this project could be completed by 2010. So it's very exciting for me and for us to be here to see, really, that we're approaching the end of a very long tunnel, and we thank you for that.

I'm here today representing the Lubbock business community, as well as the city as a whole, seeking your help in completing this project in a timely manner. The East-West Freeway is an important project to our community, but construction progress has impaired development of the area along the center of our city.

TxDOT has done a tremendous job in acquiring and clearing the right of way so projects can be let as soon as construction funds are available. While this helps expedite the construction process, it has created a path of abandoned buildings and vacant lots through the center of Lubbock. Businesses along the path also experience difficulties because of the uncertainty of the freeway construction and when it will actually begin in their area.

As an example, I spoke with the manager of a hotel that will be located along the segment of the freeway for which we're requesting funding today. While the freeway is not forcing the hotel to relocate, the hotel management realizes that their business will most likely decline during construction. The manager told me that if she knew about when construction would occur, she could plan renovations of the properties.

Another chamber member has a similar problem, in that this member is in a shopping center that will be partially demolished because of the freeway. The owner of the shopping center is not sure when he will be able to know which portion of the building will be maintained and which will not, so the tenants are in limbo, so to speak, not knowing which way they should go or what decisions they should make. Now, these are only two of many, many examples of businesses and property owners that are being affected by the uncertainty that exists today.

Timely completion is also of additional importance for the segment of freeway for which we're requesting funds today. This stretch of the freeway runs in front of three major hospitals that serve West Texas and eastern New Mexico, including one of only four Level 4 trauma centers in the state of Texas. It is very important, from a safety factor, to minimize congestion and restriction of access to these facilities.

Also, this very congested intersection is the western corridor of the downtown business district as well as Texas Tech University whose students come from all parts of Texas.

As Chairman Neugebauer mentioned earlier, we thank you very much for your support in this vital project and we ask that you help us to see it completed with certainty and in a timely manner, and I pledge to you the support of the citizens of Lubbock as this much needed project moves closer to completion.

MR. NEUGEBAUER: Thank you, Alan.

What I'd like to do now is kind of briefly run through our request to you. We're requesting $20 million of strategic priority. The city and the MPO have voted to put $8 million of our mobility money to this project for a total segment cost of $28 million. This will be the third year in a row then for 2002, -3 and -4 that we have committed our full mobility money to this project which I think should indicate our commitment to this.

The segment is broken down into two projects: one is the main lanes and the access road, and then there's a major interchange at 19th Street and US 82 with 19th Street is State Highway 114.

This segment is one of the most congested areas in Lubbock, Texas, because 19th Street and State Highway 114, US 82; it is a major gateway to Texas Tech; as Chairman Henry mentioned, three hospitals there; Texas Tech; we've got the new United Spirit arena. So, that is a major gateway to our community for people in the region and to our citizens using those highway systems.

For that reason, this project is in two phases but really I want to say to you today we really think that this project really needs to be done simultaneously because of the disruption that it's going to cause, and the two phases certainly are the main lanes and the access road which is $22.8 million; phase two is the fly-over bridges which is $5.2 million; and we're requesting you to put $3.2 million of that for the total of $20 million of strategic priority and $8 million of mobility for the total cost of that segment of $28 million.

I can't tell you how important I think it is that in the past we have, at the commission's request, tried to bring this project to you in pieces that we felt like were a comfortable bite for you, and you have been very gracious in helping us work through that process, working with TxDOT, both at the state and the local level. This is one of those projects really that I don't think we can break down into a much smaller piece than this because of the interchange that's involved and because of the location to the hospitals, and so I think we need to try to do this project with the least disruption and duration as we possibly can.

That's kind of the nuts and bolts of the request. I want to ask Senator Duncan to make a few remarks, but I would stop and see if there's any questions about the project at this point in time.

MR. LANEY: Any comments, Robert?

MR. NICHOLS: Well, I realize on your commitment you're at about a 30 percent level, the local commitment.

MR. NEUGEBAUER: Yes, sir.

MR. NICHOLS: That's a very high level. I commend the leaders for doing that; that certainly will help.

But you also broke it down by segments and then you pulled it back together and said you needed to do both.

MR. NEUGEBAUER: We really need to do both. Right. I think in the planning process of the way that TxDOT had broken down some of these projects, I think these projects may have even two different numbers, the fly-over and the main lanes and so forth, but we brought them together. It's really one request but we were showing you the two phases: one to do the main lanes and then the fly-over.

MR. NICHOLS: I know when we drove through that project when the right of way had been taken out and some of those buildings knocked out, there was not much energy for the economic development to go back until commitments were made on transportation. Because of the commitments the last two years, is it starting to look a little brighter in that area?

MR. NEUGEBAUER: You know, I think we're beginning now to where we can show that we have some funding committed, where we have that $73 million, I think people are beginning to understand that we have a plan, and what we've been able to show them, I think, is these plans will be completed end of 2000, first part of 2001. We've got a proposed letting date for some of the projects, and I think once we can show the community that we have a stream of funding to take this project to completion, it begins to let the development community have some certainty that they can begin to make plans for that.

And really, although they can start the planning, it's really difficult to really start the redevelopment until you get some of that basic infrastructure back in place and beginning to put some of the lanes in.

MR. LANEY: Johnny, do you have any questions?

MR. JOHNSON: How integral are these projects? I mean, do they require each other to be done, or could they be done separately, the fly-over and the main lanes?

MR. NEUGEBAUER: Well, I think, commissioner, what we're trying to say today is that we would like to compact the disruption to the shortest period of time, and so to the greatest extent possible that we could do both of these projects at the same time because this is just a major interchange in our community. We really think that's a better way to do that.

I mean, certainly they could be done separately but then you've got two disruption periods and some fairly critical, and I think from my standpoint, the safety issue, because we've got all of the major hospitals, and Lubbock is a huge regional draw for medical services in the region and a lot of that access is going to have to be diverted for a period of time until the road is completed.

MR. JOHNSON: Well, I certainly concur with you that as little disruption as possible is the way we would prefer to go. Obviously, funding limitations sometimes control the day.

MR. NEUGEBAUER: I understand that, certainly.

MR. LANEY: Thank you, Randy.

MR. NEUGEBAUER: We are very fortunate to have State Senator Robert Duncan with us today, and he is a hands-on senator and very interested in transportation and has been very active with our transportation issues. Senator.

SENATOR DUNCAN: Thanks, Randy. Randy does a good job; I think you know him.

I have seven seconds left. You know, I got to thinking about that, and if we impose that rule over there, you guys would like it, because I would imagine it's probably better just to be there over in the Capitol 20 seconds, because the longer you're there, the more things can happen.

We appreciate your support of this project in the past. As you know, Lubbock is a regional hub in that area. I represent other communities in the South Plains, all the way down to San Angelo, up to Plainview, and out to El Paso. Lubbock, being the regional medical center, as well as the regional higher education academic center, as well as the Big 12 athletic center, it is very critical to the region, and in that context, the East-West Freeway is the route to all of that. All of that is located right there in this particular area where this project will impact.

If you've ever driven through there, as it

is -- and I remember in college you had to be really thinking when you approached that Y intersection there, because it is a confluence of two major roadways that feed into Texas Tech and into the medical community. So I think the issue about disruption and trying to do that project all at once is going to be very critical, because it is at that point where there will be a lot of confusion and issues during construction.

Combining these projects at that point I think is important and critical to the safety and to the accessibility of that area to the region.

We're hoping to step things up in Lubbock. I believe that this project is going to be a real key to stepping things up in Lubbock. We appreciate your sensitivity to the issues there, and we know that you have been, because we know and have seen the decisions that you've made in the past.

And I think it's important, as Commissioner Nichols observed a while ago, the community is committed to this as well; this is not something that we're just asking; we're, as well, committing all of our mobility funds to this project for the last three years, and I assume that that type of commitment will continue for the city.

Thanks for your time.

MR. LANEY: Thank you, Senator Duncan. Appreciate it very much, and I can't overlook the fact that I also want to express our appreciation for your efforts during the last couple of sessions, and in part, because the result is directly felt in Lubbock in terms of the cost of the right of way acquisition.

As you know, if we had failed in terms of defending ourselves against some of the legislative initiatives that you fought on our behalf, the cost of that right of way would probably be another 40 to 60 percent higher than it is. So we appreciate it very much; it makes our dollars go a lot farther.

In my judgment, this is a project that, like many projects around the state -- but on a smaller scale, interestingly enough, than some of those projects -- that we have started and we need to continue, step by step, until we finish it. So it's really, I think, ultimately a question of whether the bite you all propose is too big a bite or whether it can be fitted into the various categories in the next go-round. I think that's going to be a major issue.

But I have to compliment your district engineer and ours, Carl Utley, who does a terrific job at trying to fit these pieces together, and I had a chance to visit with Carl. I know he's here today, and if any of the other two commissioners have questions of our DE in the Lubbock District, he is here. It's a great effort on the part of the MPO, your political representatives, Chancellor Montford and the Texas Tech operation.

And we've got a lot of things going on with Texas Tech, as I learned, and for the first time, I think, since Chancellor Montford's -- I guess during the pendency of Chancellor Montford's term, so far, the first time we've really seen the City of Lubbock and the university working as closely together as we have, and it makes a big, big difference to have those two in partnership rather than one sort of separate and independent of the other, and that makes a big difference.

We've got a lot going on -- this is just one of the issues in the Texas Tech area -- and we've got a lot throughout the district as well, and they're not all easy, but my compliments to you all for the presentation and I hope we'll be able to find room enough in the overall funding levels to help you all out this next go-round.

Any other questions or comments?

MR. NICHOLS: No other questions, but just a comment. I would like to thank the people from the Lubbock area for the leadership you have shown on regional matters, in addition to this project. You are really taking a step out and done a lot to help the Department of Transportation in organizing regional consensus and support for projects which is very helpful and very appreciated. Thank you.

MR. JOHNSON: I don't have anything.

MR. LANEY: Do you have anything more? Thank you very much. We will recess for five minutes and allow the Lubbock delegation to move out.

(Whereupon, a brief recess was taken.)

TRAVIS COUNTY (CAMPO)

(Pike Powers, Senator Gonzalo Barrientos, Senator Jeff Wentworth, Commissioner Todd Baxter, Mayor Kirk Watson, Joe Vining, Representative Sherri Greenberg, Commissioner Ron Davis, Mike Aulick)

MR. LANEY: We call the meeting to order again. We have now delegation four, the Travis County delegation, CAMPO, or Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization, and I want to welcome all of you. This is usually our unruliest crowd anywhere in the state.

(General laughter and applause.)

MR. LANEY: And proud of it. Right?

I want to welcome Pike Powers to begin the presentation. Before that, I'd like to recognize someone who has become a really good friend of transportation -- and anybody (sound of phone ringing) who has a ringing cell phone has to leave --

(General laughter.)

MR. LANEY:  -- and that is Congressman Jake Pickle. Jake, if you would stand.

(Applause.)

MR. LANEY: As most of you probably know, and if you don't, you should, Jake has really been instrumental in, I think, playing a significant role in changing the relationship or at least the role that the community plays in focusing on transportation over the last four, maybe five years. And Jake, we very much appreciate your effort. It's your initiative that got things going in a different direction.

Now let me welcome Pike Powers. Pike, glad to have you back, and you can adjust the dais with that button on the right if it's a little too low.

MR. POWERS: It's fine. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Laney, Commissioners Johnson and Nichols, and Director Heald, thank you very much, at the outset, for the opportunity to be here today to make this presentation.

A couple of footnotes. First, we want to say thanks for the opportunity to present to you in the past and today. We want to thank you very much for your help over the last several years, especially 183 and 45 last year. We brought local matches, as you know, in those instances, two years ago of $10 million and last year $11 million. We've got better news today, Mr. Chairman; we hope you're pleased. We hope that we're not too unruly and that you will salute and applaud our efforts at the end of the program.

MR. LANEY: Just understand we're never pleased.

(General laughter.)

MR. POWERS: I know, that's what you told me earlier, but we'll keep working to make you very happy.

The delegation list does describe us as being Travis County, but let me say right at the top, that would be a complete misnomer. This is, as you know, over the last couple of years, Mr. Chairman, an effort of the Capital Area Transportation Coalition, CAMPO, the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization, many business organizations, a diverse and very broad group of people that you'll meet in just a minute that come from both Williamson and Hays Counties today, so this is a true regional effort.

As you know, Mr. Chairman, we've been working very hard to get our act together over the last few years. We think we've made significant progress. We bring to you today some projects that enjoy unanimous, bipartisan, broad support across all fronts, and we ask you to endorse and support them. But it would be an unfair characterization to call us Travis County; we are the Central Texas Capital Area region.

So thank you for your efforts in the past. Our projects that we propose to you today for your consideration -- that you'll hear more about not only from our speakers, our elected public officials and other people in the communities, but also in a video that you'll see in just a few minutes -- include three in number. And you have these materials described to you in this document that's before you.

First, US 290 West and we'll hear from County Commissioner Todd Baxter from Travis County in just a minute. There are a number of citizens here in this chamber who are here from Dripping Springs and parts of Hays County to endorse and support that particular project as well. It's 2.7 miles in length and you'll hear a discussion of a more full nature in just a minute or two.

Secondly, IH-35 North at the Greenlawn Parkway or Boulevard which is a crossover proposal and it involves about $17 million worth of expenditures. You'll hear a broad delegation of people who endorse and support that in just a minute, including Joe Vining from the City of Round Rock, and the people of Williamson County are here en masse to support that as well.

And thirdly, and certainly not last, US 183 South. It's two segments of road where improvements will be made, one about 2.1 miles and the other 1.4, a total of 3.5 miles.

You'll hear all of these projects discussed in detail. We have unanimous support for all three; we ask for your support and endorsement and funding of all these three projects.

Before we get more fully into our presentation, can we show our video at this time, Mr. Chairman?

MR. LANEY: Yes, please.

MR. POWERS: Thank you very much. Day-O.

(Whereupon, the video was shown.)

MR. POWERS: We hope that was unruly enough for you for starters. We do have copies of the video for you, commissioners, in just a minute, so you'll have your own personal copy to replay over and over and over again.

(General laughter.)

MR. LANEY: I'm sure we'll go home and play them over and over again this afternoon.

MR. POWERS: They're going to win Grammys, so you'll be able to get the hot version first.

It's my genuine pleasure and privilege to introduce to you now our State Senator Gonzalo Barrientos who, as you know, is the chair of CAMPO. He is a real true leader in transportation, he's made a unique difference in our community and this part of the world, and the fact that this group is together today is due largely to his leadership. So Senator Gonzalo Barrientos.

(Applause.)

SENATOR BARRIENTOS: Thank you, Pike Powers.

May it please the commission. Commissioner Laney, Commissioner Nichols, Commissioner Johnson, Director Heald, thank you for your time and attention. Once again let me assure you that there were no state funds in the production of that video.

MR. LANEY: Good.

(General laughter.)

SENATOR BARRIENTOS: And it comes from the good enterprise by the folks here in Central Texas.

Members, all three of these projects were selected by CAMPO in a fair process, and as you know, CAMPO is one of the largest MPOs in Texas and it's predominantly made up of local elected officials from our three-county region.

While others will give you details about these projects, I want to focus your attention on our top priority project, US 290 and State Highway 71 West. It's an area of town called Oak Hill. I have a little familiarity with this project. Fiscal year 2004 -- which is when we ask you to fund this project -- is going to mark the 20th anniversary of the decision of Austin voters to build this freeway. September 8, 1984 was the date of that election, and I remember that because I chaired the campaign.

The public hearings on the freeway design were held in 1987. I remember an Oak Hill resident who came to one hearing with an infant in a backpack. That infant will be graduating from high school before this project gets underway. Now, in the meantime, dozens of businesses have been relocated because of right of way acquisitions and hundreds of others have been disrupted, every business has at least had to deal with uncertainty.

I've had more meetings with concerned business owners about this highway than I have on all other transportation projects in my district combined.

You heard me talk before about the bottleneck that existed at Ben White and I-35; you took action and it is deeply appreciated. Now there is a bottleneck just as bad at US 290 and William Cannon because that is the old two-lane 290 where the six lanes of freeway and frontage roads go in. This project, I think, affects not only Austin and Travis County but northern Hays County where Dripping Springs is growing at a rapid rate.

Commissioner Todd Baxter will give you more information about this project a little bit later on. For the record, commissioners, when the 290 project was approved in 1984, Commissioner Baxter was working on getting his learner's permit to drive.

(General laughter.)

SENATOR BARRIENTOS: Now I'd like to introduce some of the members of our regional delegation -- this might be a partial list; that's all I've been given -- if they would please stand. My colleague Jeff Wentworth, first of all, is here; Representative Sherri Greenberg; Commissioner Todd Baxter; Commissioner Ron Davis; Commissioner Karen Sonleitner; of course, our Mayor Kirk Watson; Capital Metro Board Member John Trevino; mayor of Round Rock, Robert Stluka; former mayor of Round Rock Charlie Culpepper; of course you've already introduced our Congressman Jake Pickle, former congressman -- he will always be my congressman; the mayor of Dripping Springs, Wayne Smith is also here; and possibly some other individuals.

Now I'd like, if I could ask, to have everyone who is here in favor of these projects to please stand.

Now, members, as I've said before, all three projects are important to us. As a result, we have committed 85 percent of our 2004 allocation of STP 4C funds to these projects. That's going to be about $11 million, and those funds are available for one, two, or all three projects.

Mr. Chairman, commissioners, not many Texans appreciate the amount of sacrifice that goes into your service to the people. Our delegation certainly does and we want to thank you for your very hard work and dedication to the people of Texas.

With that, let me introduce my colleague from the good city of San Antonio who has part of this area in the senate and also with CAMPO, Senator Jeff Wentworth.

(Applause.)

SENATOR WENTWORTH: Chairman Laney, Commissioner Johnson, Commissioner Nichols, Director Heald. Gonzalo is right: I live in San Antonio but I represent part of Travis County and part of Williamson County. I actually drove from San Antonio here last night to make sure I'd be here on time for this meeting this morning.

MR. LANEY: You know, Senator Wentworth, we don't take criticisms of our road sitting down.

(General laughter.)

SENATOR WENTWORTH: Well, I want to thank all of you, all four of you, actually. I've seen you in El Paso, in Lubbock, in Irving at different meetings of the State Affairs Committee, and I appreciate your appearance and the hard work you're engaged in in the interim.

Since Gonzalo mentioned Todd Baxter's learner's permit, I've got to tell you that he's here today at some sacrifice. He was invited to be part of a delegation to Bulgaria for two weeks that includes today, and he turned down that opportunity to go on a U.S. Government sponsored trip so he could make this presentation this morning to you.

(Applause.)

SENATOR WENTWORTH: You've all heard most of what I'm going to tell you right now, and I appreciate your patience and forbearance, but you've all heard before that our area will double in population in the next 20 years; you all know how bad the congestion is in our area, because you're caught in the same traffic as we are; you're also very much aware of the same growth and congestion problems throughout the state.

We are blessed to have such healthy economic conditions in our state but with that healthy economy comes growth and the inevitable pressure that it puts on our state's infrastructure, especially on the transportation system.

I'd like to stress the direct link between our healthy state economy and the Austin-Round Rock region's economy. This region is a vital part of Texas' technology driven economy and must be supported with a safe and efficient transportation infrastructure.

These highways are needed to move Texas goods. Manufacturers must be able to get their goods to the airport and must be able to get the parts they need from the airport. Just in time delivery of goods can make or break a business, and as you know, business means Texas jobs.

We're aware of the funding shortage at TxDOT and realize that local participation is extremely important. We hope that we have expressed our understanding by CAMPO's bringing 85 percent of its total STP 4C funds to the table.

Chairman Laney, commissioners, we're very grateful for highway funding in recent years. We, with your help, are making great strides to improving mobility in the capital metropolitan area.

Thank you very much for your time and your invaluable service to the state of Texas.

MR. LANEY: Thank you, Senator.

(Applause.)

MR. POWERS: Thank you, Senator.

With learner's permit, a Bulgarian passport, and money in hand, here is Travis County commissioner from Precinct 3, Todd Baxter.

(Applause.)

MR. BAXTER: Thank you for those introductions. I guess we're becoming somewhat renowned for bringing interesting videos, and I was really glad to see that we used that a capella group in the video so I would not be the youngest person in this presentation.

(General laughter.)

MR. BAXTER: Good morning, Mr. Chairman and commissioners. I would like to thank you for hearing our delegation today, and I would like to say it is an honor to me to appear before you on behalf of Travis County and as a member of the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization. We certainly do appreciate the cooperation and the assistance of the commission on our priority projects in the recent years.

All three of these projects are important to our region and economy, but the project that received the highest priority ranking by CAMPO is the Highway 290 project. This project will extend the existing western terminus of the US 290 freeway from Williamson Creek to west of FM 1826. With your help, we made this major east-west thoroughfare a freeway from IH-35 to just west of William Cannon, about where Motorola is located. We now need to continue this project beyond the Y at Oak Hill so that we can better link the eastern and western parts of our county for access to jobs and schools, to improve safety, and to reduce congestion.

As you saw on the video -- it showed it

well -- that as the roadway currently exists, we have traffic on a multi-lane freeway that funnels down to, on the freeway portion, a single lane where it just literally slams to a halt just before getting to William Cannon Drive. And the video also showed that there are times in which traffic will stack up for over a mile and a half on that area of the freeway.

Much of the right of way for this freeway section has already been purchased, and to show our strong support for these projects, Travis County has committed $2 million towards these priority projects that we will take to the voters for authorization. We have provided you with a resolution from the Travis County Commissioners Court to that effect, and we adopted that this Tuesday.

The strong community support and CAMPO's number one priority ranking for Highway 290 West illustrates why we believe that the time has come to fund this important project.

If I could, I'd like to thank all the residents and business communities of Travis and Hays counties, and specifically Oak Hill, for their persistence and patience on this project. They've been wholeheartedly committed to this project even though at times it has meant great personal sacrifice and disruption of their lives and businesses.

Mr. Chairman and commissioners, thank you very much for your time, and thank you for all that you've done on behalf of the great citizens of this state, and thank you, Mr. Laney, for all your work as chair.

MR. LANEY: Thank you, Todd.

(Applause.)

MR. POWERS: Thanks, Commissioner Baxter.

Our next speaker is the honorable mayor of Austin, Kirk Watson, a great leader in transportation issues, and he also brings money, Mr. Chairman. Kirk Watson.

(Applause.)

MAYOR WATSON: Thank you. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, commissioners, Director Heald. I am very pleased to be with you today and I want to start off by saying thank you because I sincerely appreciate the funding that the commission has made available to us, not only last year but in previous years, and I look forward to seeing the construction on those improvements, and we really do appreciate that.

My job today is to talk to you about the US 183 project. Although I want to say that I am very pleased that CAMPO has demonstrated true regionalism in its approach in terms of the three priority projects that have been brought before you today.

This year, when we look at 183, we are particularly interested in elimination of the two remaining stop lights that are on US 183. As you know from our past requests and your past granting of those requests, there's a lot of work to be done on 183, and I appreciate the role that you've played up to this point.

These last two stop lights -- one, as the video indicated, is at Loyola Lane, and the other is at Technicenter Drive -- we need to get rid of them. What that would do is it would complete a nonstop route from Cedar Park to the new airport. The roadway improvement, we believe, is essential if we're to have an effective multimodal transportation system in this region.

Now, as Mr. Powers indicated, we are definitely cognizant of the funding shortage at the Texas Department of Transportation, so I am pleased to get to stand in front of you and say that over the past couple of years the City of Austin has brought money to the table in an effort to make sure that the construction of our area's highest priority highway needs are actually met.

The City Council of Austin has not yet voted, but I will be sponsoring an item -- and I anticipate that in the month of April we will be voting on that before the end of the month of April -- but I am pleased to stand before you today and announce that in one-on-one discussions with the members of the Austin City Council, I can report to you that this city council is dedicated to assuring that what is the number one quality of life issue in this region -- that being mobility -- is met.

And I'm pleased to tell you that the City of Austin will be bringing $7.65 million to help with the construction costs and to put into the pot of money to make available for matching funds on these priority projects.

I want to also say that we recognize that for the foreseeable future, local financial participation is going to be extremely important. Frankly, it's a way of life and we know that. That's the reason we have been here, the City of Austin, in addition to CAMPO, has been in front of you over the past couple of years with money in hand.

I'm personally working to establish a dedicated source of funds to help us pay for future transportation projects, and I'm also pleased to report to you that we are working together, neighboring jurisdictions are working together, to try to consider ways that we can plan for the future as a region to make sure that we have a dedicated source of local matching funds for future roadways.

So thank you for giving us so much time today; thank you for what you've done for us in the past; I appreciate all the service that you've put in for the state of Texas. Thank you.

(Applause.)

MR. POWERS: And thank you, mayor, for bringing those funds today; we really appreciate it.

Our next speaker is Joe Vining, director of Planning and Community Development for the City of Round Rock, and he too brings money, Mr. Chairman.

(Applause.)

MR. VINING: Thank you, Pike.

Good morning, Mr. Chairman and commissioners. Let me reorient you with this intersection just briefly here. We've got I-35 going down through the center north-south, and then the proposed State Highway 45 is going east and west, and it connects with Loop 1 going to the south on the west side there.

As certainly mentioned in the video, we have Dell's corporate headquarters located in the northeast corner, and then the development called La Frontera in the northwest. The roads shown in green are under construction; the ones shown in purple are already existing; and then the ones in blue that are remaining there are either in design or soon to be in design. Of course, the red box is the location of the interchange we're talking about.

Let me make three points briefly with you this morning. First of all, we believe that the Greenlawn Boulevard interchange is a vital component for resolving congestion at the intersection of I-35 and FM 1325. This is arguably one of the most important intersections in the state of Texas when it comes to producing jobs and sales tax revenue for the state.

This project will dramatically reduce pressure from local traffic on the state system and it also connects to other regionally important roads. For example, we get a lot of traffic in the morning from Hutto and Taylor coming in US 79 to the interstate. A lot of that traffic now is rerouting itself on the east side of our community and they could also use this route coming down Louis Henna and Greenlawn to get to another interchange with the interstate.

Secondly, we share TxDOT's concern for the disruption of traffic on I-35 while the project is being built. Because the interchange is such a vital part of the ultimate solution to the area's traffic congestion, it will be built sooner or later. The question is do we want that construction today or ten years from now when traffic on I-35 will be even higher.

The city is flexible in the design of this: it can be either an overpass or an underpass, and we'll be glad to work with the district on providing the best possible solution.

Finally, let me say that the City of Round Rock has proposed to fund 20 percent of the cost of this project. Projects such as this are typically funded with 80 percent federal and 20 percent state funds, and the city's 20 percent contribution is estimated to be $3.4 million would therefore mean TxDOT would have to spend no state funds on this project, thus allowing the commission to spend its scarce dollars on other state projects.

Again, I thank you for your consideration of this matter and turn it back to Pike.

(Applause.)

MR. POWERS: Thank you, Mr. Vining.

We have Sherri Greenberg. Are there any other members of our local legislative delegation who wanted to say anything? Sherri?

MS. GREENBERG: Thank you. It is indeed an honor to be here today, and I want to thank the members of the commission for the many hours that you all put in.

You may or may not be aware, but my term will be ending in January and I will not be running for reelection, and so I've had some moments where I've been reflecting on my service as a state representative, and one of the very first actions that I took as a state representative was on the 290 project, and it involved a situation with the acquisition of right of way.

That was approximately -- or soon will be ten years ago in January. So this is a project that many people have dedicated a great deal of time to, and I know, because I know going back ten years how involved those people were, such as Mr. Osborn who you saw here today, and the many others who fill up this room today.

Why are they doing this? They're doing it because it is a matter of vital safety. If you were to see what occurs when those freeway lanes slam into the two lanes of William Cannon with Motorola and the traffic light there, it's scary. If you were to see what it's like not just to get into town or for people coming from Dripping Springs, but to try and get to a soccer game -- which I have done with my children -- it's quite needed; it really is.

So I would ask that you please see if it will be possible to support these projects, as well, of course, as the others that the delegation has brought forth. And again, I thank you for your public service to the state, to the citizens of the state.

MR. LANEY: Thank you, Sherri.

(Applause.)

MR. POWERS: We're well out of time but we do have one last slide to summarize the local match monies, Mr. Chairman, and if Nancy would put that up. This, effectively, is a 20 percent local match: CAMPO, as Senator Barrientos announced, 10.75; Travis County, as Commissioner Baxter announced, 2 million; as Joe Vining reported from the City of Round Rock, 3.4; and as Mayor Watson delivered the goods today, 7.65, for a grand total -- day-o -- of $23.8 million, 20 percent local match.

(Applause.)

MR. POWERS: So we're pleased to bring that to the commission today. We ask for your support and help, we need it desperately, and we'd be glad to stand for any questions. Thank you for letting us be here today.

MR. LANEY: Thank you, Pike. We probably do have some questions and some comments.

The first thing is when you say day-o, I'm glad you weren't part of the video singing.

(General laughter.)

MR. POWERS: Me too.

MR. LANEY: Every time you all come, you set a new benchmark, and to the extent you start slipping below the entertainment level that you delivered the last time, your funds will slip; the same thing with the dollar amount.

(General laughter.)

MR. LANEY: I'm sure we do have a number of questions and comments. Johnny?

MR. JOHNSON: The Oak Hill area is an interesting one to me. I used to travel 71/290 quite a bit on Ben White Boulevard and then through Oak Hill. Obviously that area is flourishing right now in terms of growth and development. Could somebody enlighten me as to what is going on in the Oak Hill area and the Oak Hill area farther to the west, especially after 71 forks off to the north?

MR. BAXTER: In a very brief description, phenomenal growth. There are already many homes, residences, and businesses along the portion of roadway that we're talking about, but as you head out down 290 towards Dripping Springs and out 71 towards Bee Cave and beyond, it's not just growth that we're projecting, it's plats that we see that come through the commissioners court in Travis County and the commissioners seat in Hays County, and growth that we know is occurring right now and is coming, and so we expect the problem only to get worse by the day if this project is not extended through the Oak Hill area to do the 71 and 290 interchanges.

MR. JOHNSON: The traffic backups that are occurring now, are they due to people trying to get to the developments that are out 290, I assume, and maybe a few to the north on 71?

MR. BAXTER: Yes, it's primarily out 290 and then some degree 71, too. And we've talked a lot about the westbound traffic coming from downtown, but quite frankly, the folks coming into town are facing the same sorts of congestion problems, and dangerous situations on the existing freeway as you're coming in, too. So it really is just a combination of existing businesses and new businesses and new residents that are coming in by the day.

MR. JOHNSON: Thank you.

My other question had to do with the 183 there. There are two stop lights remaining on the major portions of 183, and these two requests deal with those two?

MAYOR WATSON: That's exactly right. If I characterize this request, it is let's finish the job. The commission has been great over the past couple of years about helping us with access on state roads to the new airport, and particularly with 183. We've been before you, you have met our requests on that, and now we're left with two stop lights. So in many ways, this is, on an annual basis, we are completing that very important project and this is the request where we could then get those last two stop lights out.

MR. JOHNSON: Are there still a major intersection or two that perhaps might be four-way stop? MLK on the map looks to me like a potential for --

MAYOR WATSON: Come on up. This is Commissioner Ron Davis.

MR. DAVIS: We do have major other intersections impacted by congestion. However, you mentioned the 969-MLK intersection there at 183. What that is, that's an overpass, so the traffic light is on the overpass and not impeding any traffic traveling south on 183. And furthermore, in the two proposed lights that are being asked to have an overpass placed over them, at the Technicenter intersection at 183, and along with the Loyola Lane intersection at 183, they are tremendously congested. And I mean, the subdivisions using Loyola Lane, for an example, all the way back up to Johnny Morris Road, looking at the Colony Park neighborhood associations and the other neighborhood associations, LBJ, University Bluffs, and all the congested subdivisions around this area using Loyola Lane, and then having to compete with the traffic going to the airport on a daily basis, is mind-boggling.

If you get a chance to get in the airport situation going out there, you'll see what we're talking about in the morning and also in the afternoon. So those intersections are very critical, along with the Technicenter. Of course, we have Motorola and we have a business complex there. The Motorola Corporation sitting there are Technicenter, along with the Federal Express; another business complex on both sides of that particular intersection; so therefore, the congestion is greatly realized there, morning, evening, throughout the day.

So we need your support to get it funded. Thank you.

MAYOR WATSON: Thank you, commissioner.

If I might summarize a couple of real quick points. One is this does pretty much complete and gives you a straight shot from all the way out at Cedar Park down to the airport. That's important for a couple of reasons.

MR. JOHNSON: Where is Cedar Park on the north?

MAYOR WATSON: If you look right up there, it's in the far northwest part of what we're talking about here.

So what you would do, 183 has been improved and then you have approved funding for additional improvements. For example, one of the big blocks, what many of us refer to as the Callahan stretch which is basically just north of the river down to 71, that's now been approved. So you'd take out those and you would make a continuous highway into the airport.

That's important for another reason too. Commissioner Davis talked about some of the businesses. We are seeing, as part of our long-term planning for the region -- and I'll talk specifically about the City of Austin, our long-term planning in the city of Austin -- we are seeing the growth of some of our high tech companies in the area what I would call northeast Austin and there along 290 and up in that corridor. That's becoming a major high tech corridor as part of our smart growth initiatives and our planning, and this would allow speedy access to the airport.

It is also very critical -- and for those of you that ride on I-35, you know the situation -- for us to be able to complete that where you have a continuous roadway where we don't have the stop lights, I think will provide relief for our citizens currently using Interstate 35.

MR. JOHNSON: The statewide media has reported that a local resident and celebrity has recently won some lottery funds. Has he been approached about any leveraging on any of these projects?

(General laughter.)

MAYOR WATSON: I know he's been approached about a campaign contribution; I'm not confident -- unfortunately, under our charter provision, he's limited to $100 to that campaign contribution.

MR. JOHNSON: Well, you know, we don't have those limits.

(General laughter.)

MAYOR WATSON: Another good idea, commissioner. Let me get in touch with him. Thank you very much.

MR. LANEY: Robert?

MR. NICHOLS: A couple of comments and then I have a question -- I think it was Joe Vining, yes. But the comments really have to do with the whole, and that is for those of you -- we met with smaller groups and some of the leaders, and I want everyone to know they have done an outstanding job and you have done an outstanding job as a community pulling together, coming up with truly regional support for these projects. It's a very difficult thing.

It helps us, it helps you when CAMPO and your state elected officials and your commissioners and your mayors and city councilmen can all agree on priorities and then step up to the table. You all have done something that is absolutely amazing down here, from what I have seen in three years to do this, and it's so helpful to us and we appreciate it. Those of you who do not understand the significance of it, I'm trying to emphasize how proud you should be of your leaders who have done that.

My question on the project on the bridge, we've had several meetings, I know, on that and I know that in some of the earlier proposals that were discussed, one of them had to do with lowering the interstate.

MR. VINING: Correct.

MR. NICHOLS: And I know our engineers and our staff have advised us, and it certainly appears to me as an individual, that if we go in there and start tearing up a major chunk of Interstate 35 with today's congested situation, it would have almost disastrous consequences in disruption of traffic out there. If there is some other way to bridge across -- you know, you referred to bridging over or bridging under, and when you said those and you were flexible, were you talking about -- obviously, one was to take the bridge over the interstate. The second, were you considering going under the interstate?

MR. VINING: Yes, where the main lanes would actually go over Greenlawn.

MR. NICHOLS: You're talking about moving the interstate again.

MR. VINING: Right. The interstate going over the Greenlawn lanes.

MR. NICHOLS: That's tearing up the interstate again.

MR. VINING: Yes, sir. You have either an overpass or an under. So again, we remain flexible on that, either one.

MR. NICHOLS: I don't know that we're quite as flexible; we probably can be flexible.

MR. LANEY: Go ahead and be polite and say we're not as flexible.

(General laughter.)

MR. NICHOLS: I don't think we're going to move 35 to disrupt that project, but I think we are supportive of the project, and as soon as you can come up with some resolve on going over the interstate or under the interstate, I think we'll speed up that process.

MR. VINING: We'll be glad to do that.

MR. NICHOLS: That's fine.

MR. VINING: Thank you very much for your remarks.

MR. NICHOLS: Thank you very much.

MR. LANEY: Thank you, Robert.

Let me reiterate one thing that Robert said and that is the notion of a bridge over or a tunnel under is a lot more viable than the notion of tearing up and rebuilding that section of 35. That's just not, unless I'm missing something, a feasible alternative under the current circumstances.

My compliments on everything you all do. As Robert said, over the last few years it's really come together. Mayor Watson, you mentioned your efforts and the area's efforts and a regional continuing effort to bring the region together from a planning standpoint. That is so critical, and I know there have been some tensions between the various communities and counties and so forth with respect to emphasis on whose project gets priority and so forth. It is very important, going forward, that it not be fragmented.

Regional planning is critical, and ultimately the regional planning is going to need to pick up more, I think, than just the CAMPO region. You're talking about a population growth between here and San Antonio in pockets that are going to grow together. So whatever you do, hold the planning efforts together from a regional standpoint; otherwise, you will lose ground when you appear before future commissions. We simply can't afford a fragmentation of what needs to be an overall regional planning effort.

And there will be projects that require some prioritization that may leave some communities feeling a little left out. As long as it's done on a rational basis, ultimately I think everybody comes out ahead.

I've got a question that's only tangentially related but integrally related to what we do here, and that is we've talked about these various projects. We've got a number of other major issues going on here in the CAMPO regional area, including a number of toll projects.

I don't know, Senator Barrientos, if this is a question for you or whether it's for Mike Aulick, but I would like a response to a question that I've got, and that is, can we expect, in connection with the adoption of the new transportation plan and the amendment of the TIP -- I believe it's coming in June -- the inclusion of 130 without designation as to alignment, as well as the inclusion of other toll projects? And, I know that's a sensitive question, but it's an important one from our standpoint.

Can someone give me something on what we should anticipate on that? Senator?

SENATOR BARRIENTOS: Mr. Chairman, I think -- I forget now how long ago it was that I stood before you.

MR. LANEY: And I remember.

SENATOR BARRIENTOS: I support your decision, 130 we need. Specifically as to the routing of it, Mr. Aulick, could you remind us what the latest is on that?

MR. AULICK: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm Mike Aulick, the director of the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization.

In June we're scheduled to adopt our long-range plan for the year 2025; we're also scheduled to vote on all the toll roads in the Transportation Improvement Program. CAMPO, like other jurisdictions, has taken a preference vote on the alignment through the draft EIS process and we presented that. But all of those toll roads have been in our plan since at least 1994, and we are scheduled to vote on putting those in the TIP.

There's been a letter recently from Federal Highway Administration clarifying what has always been their position is that the role of the MPO is to put the road in the plan or not and put it in the TIP or not, but the alignment of that road is handled through the NEPA process, the National Environmental Protection Act process, and that's where the alignment is settled. So that's my understanding of the process, and so we're scheduled to vote on both the plan and the TIP on June 12.

MR. LANEY: Before you leave, let me press the issue a little bit. So can I expect to see you all take action that basically includes or confirms the inclusion in the amended TIP of those toll projects without designation or direction as to alignment in accordance with the Federal Highway letter?

MR. AULICK: Well, I can't speak for my board but that's what we're scheduled to do on June 12.

MR. LANEY: I understand. Thank you very much.

SENATOR WENTWORTH: Mr. Chairman, if I could just add.

MR. LANEY: Please.

SENATOR WENTWORTH: I support the position that Senator Barrientos just laid out; I've been on record for a long time that you all at the transportation commission level should pick that alignment. We need State Highway 130, we've needed it for a long time, so we're going to leave it to you, as far as I'm concerned.

MR. LANEY: Thank you, Senator; appreciate it very much. And needless to say, we've made no decision as to alignment. We're looking at the development of whatever the proper alignment is through the NEPA process as well, and I'd just hate to see inappropriate pressure trying to shape the direction of the NEPA process, and that's not something that I think any of us has seen before anywhere on any project in the state.

And those toll projects are moving faster at this point than they ever had and they are a critical ingredient to the overall mobility of the Austin and the Central Texas area, so I'd really like to see them stay on track. I'm a little concerned that that may derail them to some extent if we move into that kind of issue.

Terrific presentation. As I say, this sets the benchmark for entertainment but it also sets a benchmark, don't ever come in with less than 20 percent.

(General laughter.)

MR. LANEY: We'll be looking at 25 or 30 percent next go-round. These are great projects.

Let me ask one other question and then I have no further questions, and that is the contributions, are they specifically tied to any particular project, or are basically you giving us the ability to move or concentrate those funds in connection with any particular project or projects?

MR. AULICK: Mr. Chairman, once again, CAMPO last fall voted on projects and our number one priority is 290 West; the other two projects are tied for second. I think we can assume that Round Rock is quite interested in that project up there. The CAMPO STP 4C contribution, whether you want 10.75 total or 8.6 federal, is directed to our number one priority which is 290 West, and Travis County, I think their action was taken based on the priority; the City of Austin hasn't taken action yet.

Given those actions, I think we're flexible about where the money can go, but I do want to state the priority that CAMPO has stated.

MR. LANEY: I understand.

MR. AULICK: But I think we're willing to talk about it. I understand, as time goes on through the summer, there will be discussions about where these projects might rank for National Highway System funds, and we'd like to be able to work with you on how to use that money to leverage as much as possible.

MR. LANEY: I really was just asking -- and I'm sure I'm about to get the answer -- whether we can use all of Austin's money in connection with the Round Rock project.

(General laughter.)

MR. LANEY: Mayor Watson.

MAYOR WATSON: Yes. Just for clarification purposes, we have not yet voted but the thought process -- and that's really what I just wanted to share with you in response to that question -- the way the thought process was working on this is that on US 290 West you had 10.75 coming from CAMPO as a priority; you had two that, at least in our brains, we were allocating toward -- from Travis County that we were allocating toward US 290, leaving an amount still needed to get to the appropriate percentage match, 2.25. The 7.65 that we were talking about, we'd put 2.25 in that category.

On the IH-35 Greenlawn, the City of Round Rock was coming up with 3.4 which was the 20 percent, so we had put an amount still needed when we were playing with our numbers, we were putting zero on that.

And then on the US 183 South, the whole amount of a match was still needed which would be 5.4, so again, in our thought process, that's where that money, as I have talked to different people about where money would go and be characterized, that was the overall thought process.

As time goes on, when we come up with the vote, we'll be in a better position to provide you a concrete answer, but I wanted you to know how we were thinking about trying to make sure these projects were all matched and funded.

MR. LANEY: That's helpful. Thank you very much, mayor.

MR. BAXTER: Mr. Chairman, if I might just clarify the remaining piece of the puzzle. What Travis County did, and you can see in the resolution, we're bringing forward $2 million we're going to take to the voters for authorization. The way we did it was to bring all that forward, hoping that we would get to that 20 percent for all three projects of that $119 million, knowing full well that when the commissioners court took action that we were doing it in the environment of CAMPO setting out the priorities of 290 being first, the second two projects being tied for second, and also knowing that we were doing that in an environment where we allocated the STP 4C funds in priority order, knowing that at some point you would have to make the decisions: if it were one project, it would go to that; if it were two, it would go to those; and hopefully, if we could do three, then it would go to those, all three.

MR. LANEY: As you all know, we don't make decisions on these things when they're presented; we do make them in the process of going through the UTP and the Strategic Priority which is a summer and a fall exercise, and what I'm getting at is ultimately -- you all have experienced growth here -- it's the same situation, at least in most major metropolitan areas and along the border throughout the state, and there's enormous pressure on available Strategic Priority funds as well as the normal formula process through the UTP, and ultimately I'm afraid we're going to face a sizing issue in terms of trying to fit these projects -- which we'd love to do, I think, generally speaking -- into a very, very compressed level of funding. So I'm just trying to get a sense of where we're coming from and give you all that sense.

And thank you for the presentation. I think it was very well done and very helpful to all of us.

P R O C E E D I N G S (RESUMED)

MR. LANEY: Ordinarily I would recess and allow you all to leave but I'm going to hang onto the group in here right now for one other item, since it affects fairly significantly your area, and that is Item 7(e). I'm going to take this out of order since it relates to State Highway 45 in Round Rock.

Al Luedecke, if you can present this. And after this, we'll recess for the Austin delegation to leave.

MR. LUEDECKE: Good morning, commissioners. I'm Al Luedecke, director of the Transportation Planning and Programming Division.

I have some good news and bad news. The bad news is that the presentations for you for the rest of the day will not match the lyric quality that you've just seen. The good news is that you won't hear me singing.

(General laughter.)

MR. LUEDECKE: The minute order today authorizes the accelerated construction of an eastbound frontage road and a westbound frontage road on the future location of State Highway 45 in southern Williamson County. This project will go from FM 1325 west of I-35 to a point 3.1 miles east of I-35 along Louis Henna Boulevard.

This area along State Highway 45 has recently experienced extremely accelerated business development and growth which has resulted in significant traffic congestion. Constructing the proposed facility will mitigate much of the congestion and will provide a better transportation facility for the traveling public.

Right of way and utility adjustments for State Highway 45 shall be acquired by Williamson County, as outlined in Minute Order 83158, dated May 22, 1985.

The minute order presented for your consideration authorizes the department to proceed with the project development at an estimated construction cost of $17 million to be funded in Priority 1, Category 18, Candidate Turnpike Projects, of the 2000 Unified Transportation Program. We recommend your approval of this minute order.

MR. LANEY: Comments or questions?

MR. NICHOLS: So move.

MR. JOHNSON: Second.

MR. LANEY: A motion and a second. All in favor?

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. LANEY: Thank you, Al; appreciate it.

(Applause.)

MR. LANEY: That concludes our delegation presentations. We'll now recess for five minutes and allow the delegation to move out. Thank you.

`(Whereupon, a brief recess was taken.)

MR. LANEY: The meeting is now back in session, reconvened.

We have a couple of resolutions on today's agenda and first I'd like to welcome John Nau, chairman of the Texas Historical Commission. John, welcome; glad to have you on our turf.

MR. NAU: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Laney, Chairman Nichols, Chairman Johnson. I represent not only the 18 commissioners of the Texas Historical Commission, but the staff and most importantly, the county historical commissions and our friends all over the state. I too promise not to sing. You have more entertaining commission meetings than we do. I'm going to have to figure out how to jazz ours up a little bit.

I'd like to thank you -- and I won't sing -- sing your praises instead and read a resolution that was drafted by and approved by the Texas Historical Commission. It's a resolution for the Texas Department of Transportation Commissioners.

"Whereas, the State of Texas and its citizens are justifiably proud of their rich history and heritage;

"And whereas, the history of Texas is unique in the nation and provides a special sense of place to the people of Texas;

"And whereas, the preservation community in Texas is desirous of protecting and using those historic resources for the betterment of the quality of life in Texas;

"And whereas, the use of these resources has become a major part of local economic development strategies as well as the revitalization of many Texas communities;

"And whereas, the United States Congress has enacted the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century which, through the enhancements program, makes funds available to Texas communities to enhance the traveler's experience at these historic sites;

"And whereas, the Texas Department of Transportation, and particularly its appointed commissioners, have responded overwhelmingly to the needs of the Lone Star preservation community for assistance in preserving our heritage;

"Now, therefore be it resolved that the members of the Texas Historical Commission, officially assembled at their winter meeting in Dallas, do hereby heartily commend the Texas Department of Transportation and its commissioners for their leadership in implementing the Enhancements Program in such a way as to generate return from this heritage investment for many years to come.

Done this 25th day of February in Dallas."

And on behalf of the commissioners, staff and everyone in Texas and the many hundreds of thousands of tourists that will benefit from this, thank you all very much.

And if we could, I'd like to get a picture.

MR. LANEY: Thank you, John; appreciate it very much.

(Pause for photos.)

MR. LANEY: The first item, now that we're heading onto regular business, is the approval of the minutes of our February commission meeting in El Paso. Any comments or corrections?

MR. NICHOLS: So move.

MR. LANEY: A motion.

MR. JOHNSON: Second.

MR. LANEY: Second. All in favor?

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. LANEY: Wes, it's yours. I'm sorry, I missed something. I apologize. Karen Akins. Karen, I apologize; my oversight.

MS. AKINS: That's all right.

Good morning, commissioners. My name is Karen Akins, executive director of Trans-Texas Alliance, a statewide nonprofit educational organization concerned with transportation and its impacts on Texas communities.

When we formed our organization more than five years ago, one of the goals was to be proactive, not like other community groups who simply oppose things rather than actively working to create positive change. Last year we set up a Transportation for Livable Communities awards program to recognize the best of transportation in Texas. These awards are best described as the People's Choice awards for transportation.

In our first year we received 28 nominations from around the state in nine categories. Trans-Texas Alliance looked for several qualities in the nominations, including the commitment to improving the quality of life in the community, the use of new or innovative ideas, and last, but not least, positive results. I'm pleased to tell you that the Texas Department of Transportation has won three of these awards this year.

First, the TxDOT Dallas District won our Best in State award which recognizes the best transportation program operating at the state level for its Precious Cargo Program. The Precious Cargo Program promotes safety, has true statewide impact, and provides good design elements on the front end. Keeping school sites away from dangerous roads is good for all Texans, especially our most precious cargo, our kids.

TxDOT's Dallas District also tied as a winner in our Best Little Roads project category. When we set up this category, we envisioned awarding it to a Main Street project or an urban arterial streetscaping project. Instead, both winners that tied in this category are TxDOT highway projects. The North Central Expressway project was the outcome of a long and difficult consensus building process. The efforts for all parties ultimately paid off in creating a corridor that serves highways and transit, as well as bicycle and pedestrian needs. It also provides a sense of place for businesses and neighborhoods.

The other winner that tied in this category is TxDOT's Corpus Christi District for US 181 project. This project exhibited an incredible attention to detail and sensitivity to the community. TxDOT's US 181 project incorporated environmental controls and design elements into a much needed road construction project.

Congratulations on these outstanding achievements and keep up the good work. Thank you.

MR. LANEY: Thank you, Karen.

MR. JOHNSON: Thank you.

MR. LANEY: And congratulations to our Dallas and Corpus Christi districts. That's a great outcome. Thank you.

Now, Wes.

MR. HEALD: Mr. Chairman, we have another resolution for your consideration. Some two or three months ago there was a resolution given to me to present to you all having to do with removing the duties on Mexico cement. It's in your packet there. We understand Mexico produces very good cement, and as you know, we just came through a cement shortage just a short time ago which obviously cost us some money. So we ask your consideration of this resolution in order for us to continue to provide a cost-effective transportation system and to keep our cement cost down.

This resolution is simply a request to the International Trade Commission to revoke the duties.

MR. LANEY: Anyone have any comments or questions?

MR. JOHNSON: So move.

MR. NICHOLS: Second.

MR. LANEY: Great resolution. All in favor?

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. HEALD: And Mr. Chairman, if you would bear with me just a minute, I'm going to move so I can look you eyeball to eyeball. I have a presentation for you.

MR. JOHNSON: That sounds ominous.

MR. HEALD: And I'm going to change your name from Mr. Chairman to David.

David, it's been kind of a bombshell today, I guess, that you told us that you were not going to serve as our chairman anymore, and this will not be a eulogy speech. We know that we can expect great things from you and a lot of hard work in the next year.

What I have this morning is just a simple certificate of service, a five-year certificate of service to give you. It may just be a piece of paper and it may have a simple frame around it, but David, you have no idea the impact you've made on this organization. There's many of us in this room that love this department; we've spent many, many years with TxDOT; we have great passion for our work and for this organization; and in those five years, as I said, I think everybody in this audience would agree what a great impact you've had on this organization and how you have got us refocused on what is so important to us.

And it's kind of ironic that Eleanor, your wife, shows up today. I didn't tell her to come, but we're pleased that she's here, and at this time, I'd like for you to come to the front, if you would, and we will present this to you.

(Applause and pause for photos.)

MR. LANEY: Wes, if there are any more resolutions or awards that are presented with my name on them, whoever presents them is fired.

(General laughter.)

MR. LANEY: Thanks.

MR. HEALD: All right. With those instructions, we'll move on.

Agenda Item Number 4, Public Transportation. We have four minute orders for your consideration, and Margot will present those to you.

MS. MASSEY: Good afternoon. I'm Margot Massey, director of the Public Transportation Division. I will move quickly.

Item 4(a) is a technical correction being submitted at the request of the Federal Transit Administration to clarify an esoteric point of designation of recipient status to allow local governments to further delegate the recipient status. We recommend your approval on this.

MR. LANEY: Any comments?

MR. NICHOLS: So move.

MR. JOHNSON: Second.

MR. LANEY: All in favor?

(A chorus of ayes.)

MS. MASSEY: The next item is proposed allocation of Federal Discretionary Capital Funds. This is half of it; we expect to bring the urban piece to you in May; this is the rural piece, about $2.6 million, 25 percent for vehicle replacement, getting the oldest vehicles in the fleet off the road, 75 percent based on performance criteria. We recommend your approval.

MR. LANEY: Can I have a motion?

MR. NICHOLS: So move.

MR. LANEY: Second?

MR. JOHNSON: Second.

MR. LANEY: All in favor?

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. JOHNSON: Margot, what is a de-obligated U.S. DOT fund?

MS. MASSEY: Actually, those are funds from a previous earmark that for various reasons were not spent as originally proposed, so we're rolling them into this earmark and reobligating.

MR. JOHNSON: Were those funds earmarked for Texas or were they nationwide and reallocated, or were they ours all along?

MS. MASSEY: Those are funds that were originally coming to us and actually had been awarded in a contract and for various reasons -- I'm not certain at this point if bids came in lower than expected -- that's rare.

MR. JOHNSON: Thank you.

MS. MASSEY: The third item, you'll recall in December we brought you our annual Elderly and Disabled Program of projects and there was one district missing, the Laredo District, and we are now submitting that for your approval to submit to the federal officials. Recommend it.

MR. JOHNSON: So move.

MR. NICHOLS: Second.

MR. LANEY: All in favor?

(A chorus of ayes.)

MS. MASSEY: And the final item is a rather small but critical award of state discretionary funds to a rural transit operator in Sweetwater to complete a capital purchase, and we recommend your approval of this.

MR. LANEY: Motion?

MR. JOHNSON: So move.

MR. NICHOLS: Second.

MR. LANEY: All in favor?

(A chorus of ayes.)

MS. MASSEY: Thank you.

MR. LANEY: Thanks, Margot.

MR. HEALD: Under Agenda Item 5, Aviation, we have two minutes orders, and Dave Fulton will explain those.

MR. FULTON: Thank you, Wes. David Fulton, director of the TxDOT Aviation Division.

Item 5(a) is a minute order that contains a request, in accordance with Transportation Code 26, from the Franklin County Water District to restrict seaplane operations on Lake Cypress Springs near Mount Vernon to daytime visual flight rules only and prohibit touch-and-go landings. Based on the investigation of this application by our division, we feel that the request is reasonable and appropriate, and recommend your approval.

MR. NICHOLS: When we approved these rules and went through this statutory thing, but we had to do the rules, we said at some point this would be challenged. This is the first one that we basically appear to approve to deny. In your validation where we get into the safety concerns and the evaluation stuff, have we got adequate evidence to prove the safety concerns?

MR. FULTON: We think we do. There have been something like eight or nine accidents in basically seaplane history on lakes, so it is a very rare occurrence, I think primarily because it's a very small part of the aviation industry, and I think by and large most seaplane pilots operate fairly safely, so the number of national accidents are very, very small.

My deputy director went out and took a look at this lake; a public meeting was held. I don't think there will be any challenge of this at all because we attempted to address the concerns locally, and we think we did. And we think although maybe everybody wasn't totally happy with the situation, I think they were satisfied.

MR. NICHOLS: In the validation process, for instance, like on the speed limit, we go out and do a certain type of study; on a slick road surface, we'll go out and do a certain type of study. In the evaluation of determining whether it's safe or not, have we got any kind of data?

MR. FULTON: I would say it was more subjective. The person who went to make this investigation is very experienced, he has now done some seaplane flying, and he made an on-site look at the terrain, the conditions, the houses around there, the boats and that kind of thing, so he made a pretty thorough analysis, but I would say at this point it was pretty much a subjective decision on his part.

MR. NICHOLS: That answered my question.

MR. LANEY: Any questions, Johnny?

MR. JOHNSON: No.

MR. NICHOLS: So move.

MR. JOHNSON: Second.

MR. LANEY: All in favor?

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. FULTON: Thank you. The second minute order, Item 5(b), this minute order contains a request for funding approval for five airport construction projects. One of the projects is programmed to be funded with federal and local funding, 90 percent federal, 10 percent local. The other four projects are programmed to be funded with state and local funding, 90 percent state, 10 percent local.

The total estimated cost is approximately $1.7 million, approximately $1 million state, approximately $540,000 federal, and approximately $172,000 local funds. Public hearing was held on March 13 of this year; no comments were received. We would recommend approval of this minute order.

MR. LANEY: If there are no questions, can I have a motion?

MR. JOHNSON: So move.

MR. NICHOLS: Second.

MR. LANEY: All in favor?

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. LANEY: Thanks, David.

MR. FULTON: And if you'd permit me, since we're making acknowledgments today, I'd just like to thank the commission and Wes for the support you give aviation in this department, the respect and support, that's not typical nationwide; many of the state DOTs are still highway departments who find aviation an inconvenience, and we really appreciate the support you give us. Thanks.

MR. LANEY: Well, David, before you leave, let me say you and transit weren't moved up on a pattern basis to the front of the agenda for no reason. We really want to try to emphasize and focus on that.

Also, Congress has just passed something that has bumped up our funding fairly significantly. Can you tell us about it?

MR. FULTON: I can and I'll try to make it very brief. Congress has passed the most significant aviation legislation in my 25-year state history. It will increase state funding probably about 60 percent, so our state funding will go from guaranteed funding of about 25 million a year to probably about 45 million a year.

MR. LANEY: Starting in what year?

MR. FULTON: Oh one is the first bit jump. Unfortunately, they did some unusual things; most of that increased funding has been earmarked for about 100 small airports in the state which it will make it a little difficult to deal with, and I can give you as much detail at some other time as you'd like, but the funding increase, in any case, is wonderful. We wish it had been left up more to the commission's discretion.

MR. LANEY: Thanks very much.

MR. HEALD: Mr. Chairman, under Agenda Item 6, we have a number of administrative rules for your consideration. These are all under proposed adoption, starting with 6(a)(1), Chapter 3, Public Information, and Richard Monroe will be the presenter.

MR. MONROE: Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is Richard Monroe; I'm General Counsel for the Texas Department of Transportation.

In the last legislature, the legislative body made significant changes in what is often called the Open Records Act or the Public Information Act. This necessitated changes in our rules; those are before you. By approval of this minute order, we would publish these revised rules for public comment. These revisions were necessary because of the changes in the law. I would urge your approval of the minute order.

MR. NICHOLS: Any questions?

MR. JOHNSON: No questions.

MR. NICHOLS: Motion?

MR. JOHNSON: So move.

MR. NICHOLS: Second.

MR. NICHOLS: All in favor, say aye.

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. NICHOLS: Motion carries.

MR. MONROE: Thank you, gentlemen.

MR. HEALD: Agenda Item 6(a)(2), Deputy Director of the Human Resource Division Bob Eason. This is Chapter 4, Employment Practices.

MR. EASON: Good afternoon, sir. I am Bob Eason, deputy director of Human Resources Division.

This is the first look at an amendment to the education and training rules to allow what we call the Senior Year Degree Completion Program. This would allow TxDOT employees that are currently in the education assistance arena that have less than 42 hours remaining on a bachelor's degree to go to school full time, and the payback to the department will be about three years from graduation.

We anticipate at this point that we have about ten or eleven people eligible in the civil engineer arena which is the first of the areas that we would like to look at.

There are a couple of other wrinkles to the amendment. One is to allow courses provided through the internet to join correspondence courses as being courses that we would approve for education assistance funding. And the second part would be to change the designation of who approves degree plans from a dean of a school to a department chair, and this would be just to make it easier for the schools and for the students to get their degree approvals done.

We recommend that we take this forward and post it for comment.

MR. NICHOLS: Do you have any questions?

MR. JOHNSON: The commitment that participant would make to the department is what?

MR. EASON: It is three years, sir.

MR. JOHNSON: Three years after they complete the program --

MR. EASON: From graduation.

MR. JOHNSON:  -- they would return and work for three years.

MR. EASON: Yes, sir.

MR. NICHOLS: And if they don't, they have to pay it back?

MR. EASON: If they do not complete their obligation to the department and they went to school for more than three months full time and this is a full-time, salary-paid position, they would pay us back not only the education assistance, the tuition, books and fees, but also their salaries for the period of time they were in the program.

MR. NICHOLS: And if the don't pay you back, what are you going to do?

MR. EASON: Actually, we turn those over to the Attorney General's Office for collection.

MR. NICHOLS: And as far as -- I know I had some questions on this program, as some of the others did -- Wes, the number of employees, you were going to try to pull this down to just certain categories and it would really be very limited. I was concerned. I could see hundreds of employees filing for permission to do this in different degree categories. You're going to restrict it to very highly needed areas.

MR. HEALD: Absolutely. Critical positions.

MR. NICHOLS: That's Employment Practices, 6(a)(2).

MR. LANEY: Go ahead and finish it up.

MR. NICHOLS: Do I have a motion?

MR. JOHNSON: So move.

MR. NICHOLS: Second. All in favor, say aye.

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. NICHOLS: Motion carries.

MR. HEALD: Thank you, Bob.

Agenda Item 6(a)(3), Chapter 9, Contract Management, Jennifer Soldano.

MS. SOLDANO: Good afternoon. My name is Jennifer Soldano, and I am the director of the Contract Services Office.

This minute order proposes new Section 9.1 concerning claims for purchase contracts. Government Code Chapter 2260 provides a resolution process for certain contract claims against the state. That chapter applies to purchase claims of the department entered into under the State Purchasing and General Services Act.

The new section provides that a vendor may file a claim within 180 days after the date of the event giving rise to the claim. It then provides a process for informal negotiation which might include nonbinding mediation. This section requires the department to make a final offer. The section then authorizes a vendor to petition for an administrative hearing if it wishes to do so.

We recommend approval of this minute order.

MR. LANEY: Comments?

MR. NICHOLS: I have a couple of questions. I know I had some of my questions answered that I had sent in, like the 180 days versus 90, that was statutory. On page 2 of 4, line 12 and 13, the a) and the b).

MS. SOLDANO: Yes.

MR. NICHOLS: It certainly makes sense to me to have a period of time after an event occurs to file a claim, but then this also, instead of the event activating a time period, it has to do: one, with the termination of the contract, or the other, the completion of the contract which in some situations could be multi-year contracts, so you could have a claim way down here and a contract end several years down the line, and still have 180 days past that.

Is the a) and the b) statutory from the legislature?

MS. SOLDANO: The a) and the b) are statutory, and actually, that's our 60 days and we'll start the negotiations.

MR. NICHOLS: Okay. Well, if it's statutory, it's statutory.

MR. LANEY: Any questions? If not, Johnny, a motion?

MR. JOHNSON: So move.

MR. NICHOLS: Second.

MR. LANEY: All in favor.

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. HEALD: The next item is 6(a)(3)(b), our Business Opportunity Programs, Thomas Bohuslav.

MR. BOHUSLAV: Good morning, commissioners. My name is Thomas Bohuslav; I'm the director of the Construction Division.

Item 6(a)(3)(b) is for the withdrawal of proposed amendments to Sections 9.50 through 9.52, and 9.54 through 9.59, the repeal of Section 9.50 through 9.59 and the proposed adoption of new Sections 9.50 through 9.57 relating to the Business Opportunity Program.

These rules will establish policies and procedures to implement the department's disadvantaged business enterprise, historically under-utilized business and small business enterprise programs, in compliance with Transportation Code Section 201.702 and Title 49, the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 26, and consistent to the extent possible with Government Code 2161. This subchapter also establishes policies and procedures for resolving business complaints concerning the DBE, HUB and SBE programs.

These rules were proposed for adoption and publication in the Texas Register for the purpose of receiving any public comment. Staff recommends adoption. Do you have any questions?

MR. LANEY: Any questions?

MR. JOHNSON: My question is when is the comment period?

MR. BOHUSLAV: When is the comment period?

MR. JOHNSON: Yes.

MR. BOHUSLAV: We'll publish those. Richard?

MR. MONROE: It would be anticipated that we will submit these to the Secretary of State 4/3/2000 and then the comment period will begin at that point.

MR. JOHNSON: Is it common that there is a comment period relative to the repeal of sections, as well as the adoption of new sections?

MR. MONROE: Yes, sir. We're publishing new rules here and particularly, in all frankness, the nature of these rules in particular, it would seem to be appropriate to elicit as much public comment and input as we can get.

MR. JOHNSON: Thank you.

MR. LANEY: Motion?

MR. NICHOLS: So move.

MR. JOHNSON: Second.

MR. LANEY: All in favor?

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. HEALD: Agenda Item 6(a)(4), Chapter 15, Transportation Planning and Programming, Robert Wilson.

MR. WILSON: Good afternoon. I am Robert Wilson, director of the Design Division.

The minute order that I'm bringing to you this afternoon is for proposed rule amendments to Section 15.56 of Title 43 of the Texas Administrative Code. The current rules require your action any time a local government wishes to finance the construction of an approved highway improvement project.

The proposed amendments would delegate this approval to the district engineers for service projects up to $300,000 in cost and would allow delegation to the executive director, deputy executive director, or assistant executive director for other projects, but only if the local government is not requesting reimbursement of the project cost. Any project where the local government would request reimbursement would continue to be brought to you for action.

If you approve this minute order, the proposed amendments would be published in the Texas Register for comment, and any comments would be addressed, and final rules brought back to you at a later date. Staff would recommend approval of this minute order.

MR. LANEY: Comments or questions? Motion?

MR. JOHNSON: So move.

MR. NICHOLS: Second.

MR. LANEY: All in favor?

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. HEALD: Now Jerry Dike, Agenda Item 6(a)(5), Chapter 17, Vehicle Titles and Registration.

MR. LANEY: Jerry, before you get going, when are we going to see our new license plate?

MR. DIKE: They are on the street now.

MR. LANEY: Are they?

MR. DIKE: Yes, sir, and all 254 tax collectors have some.

MR. JOHNSON: Are we going to adjourn and go out onto the street?

MR. LANEY: Let's go look.

(General laughter.)

MR. DIKE: It will take a few years for them to be incorporated.

Good afternoon, finally. Sorry I jumped the gun there. Commissioners, you have before you three minute orders. The first one is proposing adoption to amendments to 17.3 which enacts House Bill 381 concerning rights of survivorship and House Bill 2176 on a length time that a lien holder has to deliver a discharge of lien.

The second set of rules is proposing adoption of 17.22 which implements House Bill 89 which allows the tax collector to determine if the reason a delinquent registration is appropriate or not to not pay the fee -- delegates to the tax collector; House Bill 924 which changes the grace period for a delinquent registration, and it also allows us to review and screen all license plates issued for obscene or objectionable material.

The third set of rules proposes 17.24 and this implements House Bill 1032 concerning disabled person placards, and Senate Bill 21 which allows institutions to get license plates for their vans or buses that transport disabled persons, and Senate Bill 132 which allows physicians in states adjacent to Texas to sign disabled person applications.

We recommend adoption of these three minute orders.

MR. LANEY: Any questions or comments?

MR. NICHOLS: So move.

MR. JOHNSON: Second.

MR. LANEY: All in favor?

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. DIKE: Thank you, sir.

MR. LANEY: Jerry, before you leave, I understand from El Niño here to my right, your left, he got his license plates three weeks ago. Now, I hope his say "High Speed" on the back of them, so they can be recognized as he moves through these small towns between here and Jacksonville and continue to investigate --

MR. NICHOLS: Don't tell him.

MR. DIKE: Do we need a commission minute order "El Niño" on the front and "High Speed" on the rear?

MR. LANEY: That works. Anything to punish him for getting his license plates before I did.

(General laughter.)

MR. HEALD: Commissioners, we go to 6(a)(6), Chapter 22, Use of State Property, Zane Webb.

MR. WEBB: Good afternoon, commissioners. I'm Zane Webb, director of the Maintenance Division.

The minute order you have before you concerns a proposed amendment to Section 2216. At the December 1999 commission meeting, the commission approved Section 2216 which allows a permit procedure for encroachments onto the right of way for attachments onto buildings that are off of the right of way. During that meeting, the commission requested that consideration of the historical significance be added to the permit process. This proposed amendment allows that consideration.

We recommend approval.

MR. LANEY: Appreciate the effort in putting this language in.

Robert, Johnny, do you have any questions?

MR. JOHNSON: No.

MR. LANEY: Can I have a motion?

MR. JOHNSON: So move.

MR. NICHOLS: Second.

MR. LANEY: All in favor?

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. HEALD: Now we're into 6(b) and these are rules for final adoption, Robert Wilson. This is 6(b)(1), Chapter 27, Toll Projects.

MR. WILSON: Good afternoon. Again, for the record, I'm Robert Wilson, director of the Design Division.

This minute order I'm bringing to you this afternoon is for final adoption of rules, amendments to Section 27.40 and new Section 27.44 that implement Senate Bill 537 of the 76th Legislature. This authorizes the commission and a regional toll authority to enter into an agreement for the regional toll authority to make improvements on portions of the State Highway System.

By Minute Order 108071, dated January 27, you approved these draft rules for publication. They were published in the Texas Register and no comments were received. We would recommend these rules for final adoption.

MR. LANEY: Questions?

MR. NICHOLS: So move.

MR. JOHNSON: Second.

MR. LANEY: All in favor?

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. HEALD: That moves us to 6(c), these are rules under review. John Campbell.

MR. CAMPBELL: Good afternoon. John Campbell, director of the Right of Way Division.

I have before you a minute order for the proposed rule review of the rules in regard to right of way operations. They include, under Title 43 of the Texas Administrative Code, Sections 21.1 through 21.15, Section 21.21, Sections 21.31 through 21.56, Section 21.71, Section 21.81, Sections 21.101 through 21.104, Sections 21.111 through 21.117, Sections 21.131 through 21.133, Sections 21.141 through 21.162, Sections 21.401 through 21.581, and Sections 21.600 through 21.606.

We recommend your approval. Any questions?

MR. JOHNSON: What sections were those again?

(General laughter.)

MR. CAMPBELL: I'd be happy to run through those for you again.

MR. NICHOLS: Please don't.

MR. LANEY: I need a motion quick, Johnny.

MR. JOHNSON: So move.

MR. NICHOLS: Second.

MR. LANEY: All in favor?

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. HEALD: 6(c)(2), Thomas Bohuslav, still rules under review.

MR. BOHUSLAV: I don't have quite as many sections as he does. My name is Thomas Bohuslav, director of the Construction Division.

Item 6(c)(2) is for final readoption of rules in accordance with the General Appropriations Bill and the Government Code. Rules reviewed under this minute order are Sections 9.3, 9.5, 9.6 through 9.8, 9.10 through 9.20, 9.50 through 9.59, 11.50 through 11.53, 13.8 and 15.13.

State law requires that we readopt rules every four years and prior to readopting, consider whether the reasons for each rule continue to exist. The stated sections were reviewed during February 2000 and the proposed rule review was published in the Texas Register on February 11, 2000; no comments were received, and the reasons for adopting these sections continue to exist.

Staff recommends approval.

MR. LANEY: Motion?

MR. NICHOLS: So move.

MR. JOHNSON: Second.

MR. LANEY: All in favor?

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. HEALD: Agenda Item Number 7, and we'll go with 7(a), (b), (c) and (d), and you'll recall you've already taken care of Item (e). Al Luedecke.

MR. JOHNSON: We were going to omit (b), weren't we?

MR. HEALD: We're going to defer (b). That's right.

MR. LUEDECKE: I'm Al Luedecke, director of the Transportation Planning and Programming Division. Excuse me?

MR. HEALD: I'm sorry. I failed to mention we're going to defer Agenda Item 7(b).

MR. LUEDECKE: That's good because I wasn't prepared for it.

(General laughter.)

MR. LUEDECKE: Under 7(a), the Transportation Equity Act of the 21st Century identified a number of projects in Texas in the High Priority Projects Program that are not construction projects and thus would not normally be approved in the Unified Transportation Program.

One such project is shown in Exhibit A in your books as a railroad track relocation study in the Bryan District. Because this study will not appear in the UTP, this minute order is prepared for your consideration. In addition, there is a general feasibility study in the Beaumont District that is not part of the High Priority Projects Program that we believe also needs your approval. This study will determine the transportation needs for western Chambers County which is now being impacted very strongly by growth from the Houston area.

We recommend your approval of these projects.

MR. LANEY: Any questions?

MR. NICHOLS: So move.

MR. JOHNSON: Second.

MR. LANEY: All in favor?

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. LUEDECKE: On 7(c), this minute order authorizes the use of Forest Highway funds for the construction of a 4.9 mile extension of the existing Farm to Market Road 201 in the Lufkin District. The department receives Forest Highway funds from the Federal Highway Administration to improve roads in national forests in Texas. This roadway construction project and designation is a continuation of the development of Forest Highway 87, formerly known as Forest Development Road 117, as authorized by the commission in 1992, '93, and '95.

The department has received approximately $3-1/2 million for the preliminary engineering and construction of this project, and we recommend your approval.

MR. LANEY: Any questions? If not, can I have a motion?

MR. NICHOLS: So move.

MR. JOHNSON: Second.

MR. LANEY: All in favor?

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. LUEDECKE: Under 7(d) is a minute order that authorizes replacement of three bridge structures on US 59 near the cities of Timpson and Tenaha in Shelby County in the Lufkin District. These three bridges are more than 60 years old and were originally constructed with timber pile substructures. One of the bridges is now classified as critically deficient and the condition data for the other two bridges indicate that they will reach this classification in the near future.

Based on this information, along with the fact that US 59 carries a considerable amount of timber truck traffic and oversize and overweight permit loads, staff recommends the department proceed with the replacement of all three structures.

The minute order presented for your consideration authorizes replacement of the three bridges at a total estimated cost of $4,820,000 to be funded from Priority 1, Category 6A, On-State System Bridge Replacement/Rehab Program, of the 2000 Unified Transportation Program. We recommend your approval.

MR. LANEY: These are not creating any additional capacity, they're just replacing the existing bridges?

MR. LUEDECKE: That's all they're doing, yes, sir.

MR. LANEY: Can I have a motion?

MR. NICHOLS: So move.

MR. JOHNSON: Second.

MR. LANEY: All in favor?

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. HEALD: Agenda Item Number 8, State Infrastructure Bank, and we have one loan for your consideration. James Bass.

MR. BASS: Good afternoon. I'm James Bass, director of the Finance Division.

This minute order seeks final approval of a loan to the town of Horizon City in the amount of $10,000 to fund environmental studies relating to plans to overlay Ashford Street and to reconstruct and widen Darrington Road and Ryderwood Avenue.

The town of Horizon City has requested a total of $264,920 associated with these projects but would like $10,000 of the total at this time to perform the environmental study. Interest on the $10,000 will accrue from the date the funds are transferred from the SIB at a rate of 4 percent, with payments beginning in April 2001.

If the remaining $254,920 is later approved by the commission, the final advance would be added to the amount owed and the total would be repaid no later than nine years from the date of the last transfer. If no additional funds are approved by the commission in the future, the $10,000 plus interest will be repaid in two years.

Staff recommends approval.

MR. LANEY: Nine years seems long for a loan this small. Is this because it's disadvantaged?

MR. BASS: It's an economically disadvantaged county -- or they're located in El Paso County which is an economically disadvantaged county.

MR. NICHOLS: It's really going to be a $264,000 loan.

MR. BASS: Correct.

MR. LANEY: Any questions? If not, can I have a motion, Robert?

MR. NICHOLS: So move.

MR. JOHNSON: Second.

MR. LANEY: All in favor?

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. HEALD: Items 9(a) and (b), Thomas Bohuslav under Contracts.

MR. BOHUSLAV: Commissioners, my name is Thomas Bohuslav; I'm the director of the Construction Division.

Item 9(a)(1) is for the consideration of the award or rejection of highway maintenance contracts let on March 7 and 8, 2000, whose engineers estimated costs are $300,000 or more. Staff recommends award of all projects in the exhibit.

MR. LANEY: Pretty clean process. That's great. Motion?

MR. NICHOLS: So move.

MR. JOHNSON: Second.

MR. LANEY: All in favor?

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. BOHUSLAV: Item 9(a)(2) is for the consideration of award or rejection of highway construction and building contracts let on March 7 and 8,2000. Staff recommends award of all projects in the exhibit.

MR. LANEY: When you're not rejecting any, I'm nervous. Can I have a motion?

MR. NICHOLS: So move.

MR. JOHNSON: Second.

MR. LANEY: All in favor?

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. BOHUSLAV: Item 9(b) is for the cancellation of a portion of last month's minute order awarding highway improvement contract for maintenance. Last month we awarded a contract to L.J. Earnest. We determined that the company was merged out of existence prior to that letting; therefore, this minute order cancels the portion of last month's minute order, Number 108115, that awarded the contract to L.J. Earnest. Staff recommends approval.

MR. LANEY: Can I have a motion?

MR. NICHOLS: So move.

MR. JOHNSON: Second.

MR. LANEY: All in favor?

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. HEALD: Under 9(c), Contract Claims, we have two contract claims, and Mike Behrens will explain those.

MR. BEHRENS: Good morning, commissioners. My name is Mike Behrens, director of Engineering Operations.

We have two minute orders for claim settlements. One is in Lamar County for Project STP 99(11)RM with Buster Paving as the contractor. They filed a claim in the amount of $115,718.33 for additional compensation for using a different type of equipment in the process in order to get the work done other than what we thought it would take to get the work done.

We heard the claim and the committee offered a settlement of $76,000, and we're going to recommend that.

And we'll just go ahead and take this other one if it's all right with you. The other claim was Travis County, the contractor was Bay Maintenance Company, the project was STP 96(831)R. The claim was filed in the amount of $919,121.90 for additional compensation for delays and production losses, et cetera. We met on February 8, 2000, and the committee offered a settlement to the contractor of $250,000.

Both of these amounts that we offered were accepted by the two prospective contractors and we recommend that these minute orders be approved.

MR. LANEY: Approval of the two minute order settlements.

MR. JOHNSON: So move.

MR. NICHOLS: Second.

MR. LANEY: A motion and a second. All in favor?

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. HEALD: Item Number 10, Contested Case, Jerry Dike.

MR. DIKE: Jerry Dike, director of Vehicle Titles and Registration.

This is one that we wished we did not have to bring you. This minute order asks the commission to adopt the administrative law judge findings that orders us to issue a license plate deemed objectionable. We recommend approval.

MR. LANEY: There's no alternative?

MR. DIKE: The alternative probably is for you not to approve this minute order, and I'd defer to General Counsel as to what would happen then. The person would probably take us to court and have the support of an administrative ruling from the State Office of Administrative Hearings.

So Richard, do you want to elaborate on that: what would happen if they choose to not approve this minute order?

MR. MONROE: If you choose not to approve the minute order -- I'm trying to think of a kind way to say this -- other than our taking it to court, I don't believe you have grounds on which to refuse to approve the judge's decision.

MR. LANEY: If we did it, what would happen?

MR. MONROE: I don't know.

MR. LANEY: I mean, would it go to district court for litigation?

MR. MONROE: Yes.

MR. LANEY: So whoever this potential plaintiff is would have to bring litigation and go through that whole exercise.

MR. MONROE: Yes. My recommendation is that you approve the minute order.

MR. LANEY: Why? I'm sorry. I find it very objectionable to approve something that allows a license plate like this to go out.

MR. MONROE: Well, commissioner --

MR. LANEY: And I don't mind making it difficult to get to that point for whoever is after this license plate.

MR. MONROE: Let me explain just a little bit about this. This license plate was given to this individual by the FCC; he didn't pick this, and at the hearing, it was educed that the facts of the situation truly are he was given N-zero-S-H-T, and it was found by the hearing officer, under our rules, that we did not have the authority to deny him this particular license plate.

Now, I think that is debatable, but that was the finding of law made by the administrative law judge. That would have to be overturned by a district court.

Furthermore, this would be a case where enthusiasm on our part might make some bad law. If we want to take a case involving an allegedly obscene license plate to court, I would suggest that there are probably better cases and fact situations we could use that would make us some better law, if that's what we want to do.

MR. LANEY: Well, we have the ability, ordinarily, to deny a request for a license plate that's objectionable. Right?

MR. MONROE: Yes, we do.

MR. LANEY: So we don't need to make law on that front. The question is this one particular instance of a license plate and whether it's easy or less easy for somebody to get to the goal line in connection with this.

MR. JOHNSON: Can I ask a question? Can we perhaps take a different tack here? The court found that we can't say that amateur radio license plates are personalized plates.

MR. MONROE: Yes.

MR. JOHNSON: That's the basis of their ruling. In the next session, can we ask the legislature to incorporate amateur radio license plates as personalized plates? Then that would give us the authority to deny, and in that instance, we could go in this particular case --

MR. MONROE: I think we can do better than that. Mr. Dike would like to comment on that.

MR. JOHNSON: Good. How can we do better than that?

MR. DIKE: Well, the rules that you approved just a few minutes ago would give us that authority in the future, so in the future we will have the approval authority to remove any obscene or objectionable for all license plates instead of just personalized.

MR. JOHNSON: So we don't need to necessarily go to the legislature.

MR. DIKE: No, sir. We can do it by the rules you've already passed or proposed and in the future we can not issue this plate again.

MR. JOHNSON: Can we revoke this plate after it's issued?

MR. DIKE: Yes, we would have the authority to cancel this plate and try to get it recalled.

MR. LANEY: The last phrase: try to get it recalled, or just recall it?

MR. DIKE: Well, we can recall it and we can have the sheriff pick it up, yes, sir.

MR. LANEY: This will be your job.

MR. JOHNSON: I'll deputize you.

(General laughter.)

MR. MONROE: I guess I'm not going to be the poster boy at all today, but I will put in my two cents worth anyway. We might want to give some thought about, once this fellow has gone to SOAH and gotten a ruling in his favor, whether or not we want to automatically go back and yank his license plate the first thing after these rules become final, if indeed they do become final.

MR. NICHOLS: Do we want to think about this one another month?

MR. LANEY: How about another couple of years? No, I'd love to. If we know that we're going to have the authority under the new rules, once they're adopted, to, in effect, retrieve this, I don't mind deferring it another month if you want to think about it.

MR. NICHOLS: It sounded like you were

still --

MR. LANEY: I'd rather either not approve it or assume that we're going to try to recall it because I sure don't like it being on the road under our auspices. And I understand the niceties of the legal issues, Richard; I appreciate it. But yes, you're not the poster boy this morning.

(General laughter.)

MR. LANEY: Let's go ahead and see if there's a motion to go ahead and adopt this subject to a clear understanding that under these new rules we'll have authority to address this issue subsequently on a retroactive kind of basis. I presume that's what you're saying, Jerry.

MR. DIKE: Yes, sir.

MR. LANEY: Motion to approve?

MR. NICHOLS: Wait and see what the new chairman wants to do.

MR. JOHNSON: I would so move.

MR. NICHOLS: And I'll second.

MR. JOHNSON: I just don't think we ought to go in the face of a ruling of an administrative judge or court, and if they rule that way, we need to follow their instructions.

MR. NICHOLS: And I'll second.

MR. LANEY: A motion and a second. All in favor?

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. DIKE: And I think we understand the commission's intent that we do not want these in the future which we 100 percent agree with. Thank you, sir.

MR. HEALD: That takes us to Routine Minute Orders, and we have quite a number of those, and I'll go through those without stopping unless you stop me or have questions.

Agenda Item 11(a), Speed Zones, establish or alter regulatory or construction speed zones on various sections of highways in the state.

11(b), Highway Designation, this is in Shelby County, FM 3534, designate a new location as FM 3534 from US 96 northwesterly to the new community complex west of the city of Center, a distance of approximately one mile. And Mr. Chairman, I understand there may be a delegation here or a group of people that you may want to recognize from Center.

MR. LANEY: You bet. We'd very much like to. Is there a group from Center, Texas? Great. Thank you very much. Is there someone who wants to speak on this particular issue? Don't feel obliged.

MAYOR WINDHAM: Twenty seconds? I'm an elected official, Mr. Chairman, so I guess I do follow that rule.

Mr. Chairman and members, I am not prepared to speak to you but I can tell you a little something about our road situation here. I'm John Windham, I'm the mayor of Center, Texas.

We are so proud of the fact that we're getting ready to build a new high school, the first one since 1936. It burned in '67; we rebuilt it. We voted a bond issue for that, we asked for an EDA grant for a vocational/technical school through the government, we got a grant from them, and we furnished $775,000 of our own money locally to match that grant to build a vocational/technical school, and Mr. Bo Pilgrim gave us 40 acres of land for a huge park and it's all in the same vicinity.

We have a one-lane dirt road that gets under water when it rains going to that whole facility. We do need that road built. I have the understanding that we have a letter here from our local transportation division stating that they would build the road and that's why we're here. But from my city manager, I understand our numbers aren't working, that there's about -- they want to take it out of discretionary funds, about $800,000, as I understand it, and it's going to cost about a million two to build that road.

We were talking earlier back in the back. We said, We've milked our cows, they're all dry. We just raised three-quarters of a million dollars to build a voc-tech school locally from various industries and other organizations in a town of 5,000 people, so we've pretty well drained our resources there. We definitely desperately need this road into this big new facility. There's going to be a new high school, $12 million high school, a new voc-tech school, a new city park, and right now it's a one-lane dirt road. That's what we're here for.

MR. NICHOLS: I'll also comment in addition to that being a road that the community feels is needed going out that way, it also, in your proposed loop that will go around -- it doesn't show it on this map -- but it also approaches and gets very close to connecting to that new loop, so it would be a state-to-state connection with the paved road.

MAYOR WINDHAM: Yes, sir, that's correct. When that loop is finished around there, it would be, I don't know the exact mileage, but probably less than half a mile to continue on over to the loop.

Anybody else have any questions? Thank you, commissioners.

MR. LANEY: Thank you, mayor; appreciate it.

I should mention, I believe, mayor, you mentioned you were class of '59 at A&M?

MAYOR WINDHAM: Yes, sir.

MR. LANEY: I believe Wes Heald was the same class, if I'm not mistaken.

MR. HEALD: Well, I was going to tell you that if you can show some evidence that you are class of '59, I'll ask the commissioners to give you anything you want.

(General laughter.)

MAYOR WINDHAM: It won't come off but I've worn it for 40 years now -- right? Very proud to be the class of '59. Thank you.

MR. HEALD: Good to have you here.

Item 11(c), Right of Way Disposition, Purchase and Lease. Starting off with the first one, Dallas County, IH-30 at Northwest Drive in Mesquite, consider the exchange of drainage easements, and that is a donation.

The next one being Item (2), DeWitt County, US 183 at Hospital Road in Cuero, consider the sale of a surplus highway easement.

Number (3), Hardin County, US 96 at Village Creek Lane in Lumberton, consider the sale of a tract of surplus right of way to the abutting landowner.

Number (4), in Moore County, FM 119/FM 721 at FM 1284 northeast of Dumas, consider the release of surplus easements and removal of right of way from the State Highway System.

In Rains County, being Item Number (5), FM 514 approximately 1.4 miles east of SH 19, consider the sale of a tract of surplus right of way to the abutting landowner.

Continuing on with donations to the department, 11(d)(1), Harris County, FM 1093 at Westheimer Road east of McCue Road in Houston, consider the acceptance of a land donation.

In Potter County, approval for the Department to accept a donation from the Amarillo Convention and Visitors Council of various items during the 45th Annual Texas Travel Counselors Conference from April 16 through 20 of this year, the city of Amarillo, and I understand this routinely happens each year.

And Number (3), Various Counties, approval for the department to accept a donation from McCoy's Building Supplies which will be used toward the purchase of recognition items for 150,000 volunteers participating in the Don't Mess with Texas Trash-Off on April 1, 2000.

The next item, 11(e), Eminent Domain Proceedings, various counties, request for eminent domain proceedings on noncontrolled and controlled access highways, and there's a list there showing those.

And that completes our business portion of the meeting, Mr. Chairman.

MR. LANEY: Can I have a motion for 11(a) through --

MR. JOHNSON: Can I ask one question? On the Harris County acceptance of the land donation -- and maybe Richard Monroe, is he still here -- the agreement by the landowner is to replace the trees, plant the six trees. Is there a time frame, once we've accepted this donation, that he will deliver on his part of the agreement?

MR. MONROE: I don't know.

MR. JOHNSON: Could we make sure there is and that it's reasonable?

MR. MONROE: Yes.

MR. JOHNSON: Thank you.

MR. LANEY: With a little care, I think you can plant these trees during certain seasons, like fall and winter but not spring and summer, probably pretty easily, so be careful. We don't want to rush it and have trees that die.

Okay 11(a) through (e), can I have a motion?

MR. JOHNSON: So move.

MR. NICHOLS: Second.

MR. LANEY: All in favor?

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. LANEY: That completes the business, I believe. We have one person signed up for the public comment, Open Comment Session, Robert Gray. Oh, I'm sorry. John Costello. I'm sorry, Mr. Costello, I apologize.

MR. COSTELLO: I'm John Costello. I was stationed at Robert Gray Army Airfield for eight years; I have an airline transport rating and almost 10,000 flight hours; and I just wanted to bring out a couple of points on Robert Gray Army Airfield.

Fifteen hundred feet from the centerline at Robert Gray Army Airfield is the ammunition storage area for Fort Hood. It's located in Seven Mile Mountain.

MR. LANEY: Would you say that again? I'm sorry, I missed it. How many feet?

MR. COSTELLO: Fifteen hundred feet from the centerline of the Robert Gray Army Airfield is the ammunition storage area for Fort Hood. It's in Seven Mile Mountain. Also on the east side is Beacon Hill which is about 150 feet above the runway terrain. There's a photograph of a C-17 taking off with the hill in the background.

In this copy I made here of the AP-1 is a planning manual that military pilots use when they go to a new airfield, and if you look under flight hazards, you'll find Robert Gray Army Airfield. Robert Gray Army Airfield, their night vision goggle training at night that runway lights may be dimly lit or completely turned off. Many times I've landed at Robert Gray Army Airfield and broke out on an instrument approach only to find out that the runway lights were turned off because they were doing night vision goggle training.

Every time I've landed there, I've had time to talk to the tower to tell the tower to turn the lights on. When you're coming in on an instrument approach, you're talking to Robert Gray approach control, not the tower. The tower is dealing with helicopters in the area and possibly doing night vision goggle training.

They talk in there also about the hills and the runway obscured by the hills; they talk about a water tower that's 1,225 feet to the east of the centerline; they also talk about aircraft that are without conspicuous markings.

Also at Robert Gray Army Airfield, not only do you have the terrain on both sides of the runway, you also have the turbulence off of that terrain. There's a copy in there of the aeronautical information manual where they talk about winds and severe turbulence next to terrain. I know from experience that those hills will give you severe turbulence in certain wind conditions.

Robert Gray Army Airfield only has one runway. When that runway goes down, you're out of luck. It was closed for three months here not too long ago. Some of the traffic went over to Draughon-Miller Regional Airport. Also, just to the north of Robert Gray Army Airfield is Restricted Area 6302 Alpha which goes to 30,000 feet. It's a continuous operation. Only once in eight years have I ever flown through that restricted area. This will add time to some flights coming from the north.

Also, the ramp area that they're talking about, if you look at it, is just a Band-Aid for the future; it will not fit the region's needs. Also, Robert Gray needs a backup airfield. They have all their eggs in one basket. When they deploy, they have to go down to San Antonio for their C-5As.

Also, Draughon-Miller Regional Airport have three airways that go right over the top of it. It has Victor 17, J-21, J-25. I'm trying to read my notes here. Also, there is one other point I'd like to make. The Killeen Airport right now is a very unsafe airport for what they're using for these turbo-props coming in. I think all of you know that American Eagle went off the other end of the runway.

I'd like to make a point here. They have 5,495 feet; they also have a displaced threshold of 844 feet. That means that that's not usable, that's behind you. If you look in the aeronautical information manual, it says that the touchdown zone is 3,000 feet. Well, if you subtract 844 feet and 3,000 feet, you come up with 1,651 feet. We're operating these aircraft on an airport that's right on the borderline. It's dangerous. And there's a gas station right at the end of the runway. Had that aircraft have gone another 75 feet, 100 feet, it would have wound up in a gas station.

And that's about all I have. If you have any questions.

My kids live in Copperas Cove; I don't want them flying out of this airport; this is a military airfield. And there's one other thing I didn't mention. If you look at those photographs there, you'll notice the rubber on the runway on the south end, you'll notice that nobody lands on the south end of the runway and that's because the runway is like a ski slope, so you put this small terminal area in there and to the south side the terrain falls off, to the north side they have Beacon Hill which they'll have to tear down to expand to the north. Both of these would be cost prohibitive.

I think the money would be better spent on I-35 leading to Draughon-Miller Regional Airport. You have an excellent airport that will serve the region for many, many years to come. It's a diamond in the rough. Thank you very much.

MR. LANEY: Thank you, Mr. Costello. Those are interesting comments and information. Thank you for passing along the information.

Any more business? At this time, we'll recess the meeting for the commission to meet in executive session, we'll meet in the room back there for about 15 to 20 minutes, pursuant to a notice given in the meeting agenda filed with the Office of the Secretary of State. We're in recess now.

(Whereupon, the meeting recessed at 1:30 p.m., to reconvene at 2:13 p.m., following executive session.)

MR. LANEY: The meeting of the Texas Transportation Commission is reconvened. The commission has concluded its executive session with no action being taken. We were advised on matters by counsel with respect to prospective litigation.

If there's no further business before the commission, I will entertain a motion to adjourn.

MR. JOHNSON: So move.

MR. NICHOLS: Second.

MR. LANEY: All in favor?

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. LANEY: It is now 2:13. The meeting is adjourned.

(Whereupon, at 2:13 p.m., the meeting was concluded.)

C E R T I F I C A T E

 MEETING OF: Texas Transportation Commission

LOCATION: Austin, Texas

DATE: March 30, 2000

I do hereby certify that the foregoing pages, numbers 1 through 166, inclusive, are the true, accurate, and complete transcript prepared from the verbal recording made by electronic recording by Penny Bynum before the Texas Department of Transportation.

04/17/00

(Transcriber) (Date)
On the Record Reporting, Inc.
3307 Northland, Suite 315
Austin, Texas 78731