Texas Department of Transportation Commission Meeting

Commission Room
Dewitt Greer Building
125 East 11th Street
Austin, Texas

9:12 a.m. Thursday, April 26, 2001

COMMISSION MEMBERS:

JOHN W. JOHNSON, Chair
ROBERT L. NICHOLS
RIC WILLIAMSON

STAFF:

CHARLES W. HEALD, Executive Director
RICHARD MONROE, General Counsel
HELEN HAVELKA, Executive Assistant, Engineering Operations
 

PROCEEDINGS

MR. JOHNSON: Good morning. It is 9:12 a.m. and I would like to call this meeting of the Texas Transportation Commission to order. Welcome to our April meeting; it is a pleasure to have you here today.

Note for the record that public notice of this meeting, containing all items of the agenda, was filed with the Office of the Secretary of State at 2:24 p.m. on April 18.

Before we get started with our delegations, I believe that Executive Director Wes Heald has a few words to say. Wes.

MR. HEALD: Thank you, Mr. Johnson. I have a special presentation to make at this time to a TxDOT employee -- in fact, it is to a very special TxDOT employee, and I would like at this time to ask Mr. James Grayson from the Houston District to join me. James, if you'll just stand beside me here.

James, as I said earlier, is a Houston District employee and he has been a loyal, dedicated employee of TxDOT for a long time, and I'll read the resolution in just a moment here, but he has also been an employee of the Texas Highway Department, the Texas Department of -- let's see, what did we call it? -- Highways and Public Transportation, and TxDOT for over 55 years, and this agency is 84 years old and this is an all-time record for TxDOT, and this is a special day for you, James.

(Applause.)

MR. HEALD: As we looked at the records, we found several that have gone over 50 years. Mr. Battle, who was a former district engineer in the El Paso District, served the department for over 51 years, and Joe is still doing well, retired for quite a long time in El Paso. The former secretary to the commission, a lady by the name of Clara Bewie, served over 50 years; and Burt Clifton, who is a current active employee in the Fort Worth District has served over 52 years -- the fact is he wants the record but James won't retire.

(General laughter.)

MR. HEALD: But Burt has got 52 years and two months. And at this time, if you'll bear with me, I'd like to read the resolution, James, that we've prepared for you.

"Whereas, James Grayson has served with the Houston District of the Texas Department of Transportation for more than 55 years and has been associated with this department for more than 65 percent of its existence;

"And whereas, the department has had three names: the Texas Highway Department, the State Department of Highways and Public Transportation, and the Texas Department of Transportation, and the Houston District has had five district engineers during Mr. Grayson's tenure;

"And whereas, Mr. Grayson in 1946 began his career with the department as semi-skilled labor in which he helped to draft work for maintenance projects;

"And whereas, Mr. Grayson in 1956 achieved his engineer's license through night courses at the University of Houston;

"And whereas, Mr. Grayson has witnessed and played a part in many of the most monumental changes in the Houston's highway system;

"And whereas, Mr. Grayson has been involved in projects ranging from Interstate 45 the Washburn Tunnel in 1952, the Baytown Tunnel in 1953, the Texas 159 Bridge over the Brazos River, the Quintana Swing Bridge in 1957, and the Texas 146 Fred Hartman Bridge in 1995;

"And whereas, Mr. Grayson and his crew has witnessed the development of labor-saving technology including the invention of the computer chip for the handheld calculators" -- it's a shame you didn't invent it instead of just witnessed it.

(General laughter.)

MR. HEALD: "And whereas, Mr. Grayson works every day to make bridges safe in Texas, safer for travelers and for the development of the state's economic prosperity;

"And whereas, Mr. Grayson possesses a keen wit, a loyal heart dedicated to serving the people of Texas;

"Whereas, be it resolved that the Texas Transportation Commission does hereby extend its sincerest best wishes to Mr. James Grayson for his dedicated and loyal service through more than five decades to the Texas Department of Transportation, presented this day, the 26th of April, 2001."

And in addition to that, I have a letter from Congressman DeLay, a nice letter to James, and I won't read that other than to say he just said he was sorry that he couldn't be here with you today but he wishes you well.

And I believe at this time Judge Eckels also has a resolution, and after he presents it, then we want to take some pictures, James, so if you'll just stand by.

JUDGE ECKELS: Mr. Chairman, members, I'm honored to be here today honoring somebody who has battled cancer, has had a heart bypass; he hasn't let anything slow him down coming to work. In fact, we were trying to find someone who had served longer than Commissioner Fonteno, and ultimately came up with Mr. Grayson.

(General laughter.)

JUDGE ECKELS: We are pleased to have a proclamation today from Harris County congratulating Mr. Grayson, and I won't read through as many whereases to save some of your time here today because we count much of that, but he has, in fact, served since before Truman was president and has witnessed many, many changes in our community, had a profound impact on the growth of the region and the growth of the highway system in the region, and the safety and the mobility that we have.

And I know that he would appreciate it very much if you would put more money into the Harris County Houston District as well.

(General laughter.)

MR. ECKELS: So for all of those reasons, I'm here to recognize today from Harris County, Texas -- and we did it up here because we didn't want anybody back home to know what we were doing, but today is James Grayson Day in Harris County, Texas, and we further extend sincere appreciation for your many years of service to the community, and Mr. Grayson, I want to honor you today.

MR. GRAYSON: Thank you.

(Applause.)

MR. HEALD: Thank you, Judge Eckels. In addition, James will be recognized this morning by both the House and the Senate too, so we're going to escort him over there in just a few moments.

I understand that your wife and daughter, Ted and Nancy, are here in the audience too. So James, we're extremely proud of you and what you have done and your loyal, dedicated service to the department, and hope that you'll go for 60 now.

I want to go ahead and present this to you, but I know it's big and heavy, and we want to take some pictures now, so you can pick that up as we leave. So we'll take a few pictures, commissioners, if you would come down.

MR. JOHNSON: Mr. Grayson, I want to add I think you're an inspiration to us all and that you embody what this department is all about, and on behalf of its 14,000-plus current employees and everyone who has worked here, thank you so much for all that you've done.

MR. GRAYSON: Thank you. I enjoy it.

MR. HEALD: I'm going to ask Mr. Trietsch to come up also for some pictures.

(Pause for photos.)

MR. JOHNSON: We will now progress to the delegation portion of our meeting, and we have three delegations this morning, and we have quite a few of the distinguished ladies and gentlemen from across the street who serve this state so well, and I would like for them to come up first so they can get back across the street because there's a lot of work left to be done.

I'm going to take you in order of delegation appearance, and the Houston area is first, and if I don't have a card on you, please feel free to come up, but the first card I have is Senator Buster Brown. Senator, welcome.

SENATOR BROWN: Thank you very much. I appreciate being here and thank you for your continued courtesies that you show to the legislature, particularly during the session.

MR. JOHNSON: You know, that is a two-way street -- at least we're hopeful it is.

(General laughter.)

SENATOR BROWN: That's right, it sure is.

I'm proud to be here today to add my support for the TRIP 2000 report that the Houston Partnership is bringing forward. I appreciate Jim Royer asking me to come over and say a brief few remarks.

I've done quite a bit of work in the last several years on issues related to water and air, and one of the interesting observations that's come about during that process was the most often-made response was we haven't done it this way before, because we were doing things a little bit differently than we have in the past.

And I think the same thought needs to move over into our transportation issues as we look at how we're going to solve these issues over the next decade, and that is that we have to start thinking a little differently than we have in the past, and that's the legislature in ways of being creative on funding mechanisms and ways to get more dollars to the necessary parts of the state through the commission and the local entities need to approach the subject a little differently than simply more dollars and more highways solve our transportation and our travel rate issues. We're going to have to look at all the issues and cause our local entities to be more creative, more innovative, and to start looking outside the box, as they say.

I couldn't help but think, commissioners, of this gentleman when I first ran for office in 1980. I went into a little café, shook every hand, and the lady, the waitress said, "Be sure and shake that gentleman's hand over in the corner; it's his 92nd birthday." And I went over and said hi to him and congratulated him and asked him -- it was down in Port Lavaca -- I said, When did you come to this part of the country? He said, "Son, I was born right down the street, I've lived here all my life." I said, Ninety-two years you've lived in this community. I said, Wow, I'll bet you've seen a lot of changes take place during that time. And he said, "Yep, and I've been against every damn one of them."

(General laughter.)

JUDGE ECKELS: And so I recognize that when we start talking about doing things just a little differently than they've been done in the past, that it does cause some different emotions to come. But I would say that I am proud of the Houston Partnership and the way they are looking at these issues, looking at doing things creatively, innovatively, with a different approach, and I think that's what it's going to take to be able to make the maximum use of these sought-after dollars and meet the challenges that this expanding population and growing economy is going to need.

So thank you for your attention today, thank you for your continued cooperation with us, the delegation that's here, and we look forward to a successful session and look forward to a good response from today's meeting. Thank you very much.

MR. JOHNSON: Thank you.

Representative Peggy Hamric.

MS. HAMRIC: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Commissioner Nichols. It's nice to be over here on this side of the street to see you instead of over in the Transportation Committee where we usually meet every week.

I am here this morning representing the 25 House members in the Harris County delegation, and it is in that capacity that I am in support of the Greater Houston Partnership concerning their travel rate improvement program, the TRIP program for the Houston area.

I certainly feel a little inadequate talking about the growth and the changes in the Houston area when Mr. Grayson has spent 50 years in that area, and I guess from now on he'll be known as the Cal Ripken of transportation in Texas since he's gone to work and done his job and certainly been a wonderful example in the transportation issues.

The Houston region, commissioners, has grown over 20 percent during the last decade and the recent census -- and all of us across the street in the pink building have become increasingly aware of the census in the last few weeks -- indicate that the growth has not only been in Harris County but has increased at an even larger percentage in the suburban counties surrounding the Houston area.

Our area has been the recipient of a healthy economy which has contributed to the commuting public going back and forth between the city and the suburbs. Now, this is a problem I know most people would like to have. The downside has been our ability to get around the area in an expedient manner, and I don't have to tell Chairman Johnson that since he lives in Houston. We're no strangers to gridlock in that area.

A few years ago we could plan our trips at non-rush hours and do fairly well, but now there's certain areas, as you know, that we can't plan trips. And I know Ms. Woolley was going to be here today and talk a little bit more about the Galleria area and the Katy Freeway problem that we have in Houston, but she won't be able to be here this morning, but I know that's a problem you hear about. Every time you come to the Transportation Committee, usually Katy Freeway is brought up -- of course, we do have projects on I-45 and 59.

It was interesting enough, one of the inner city representatives told me the other day that the worst traffic he had seen in Houston in years was out in my district on FM 1960, so even our farm-to-market state roads are now becoming congested.

And I know I'm preaching to the choir when I talk about the subject of mobility and I know it's not unique to the Houston-Harris County region, but as a member of the Transportation Committee, you know we hear bills every week dealing with mobility problems all over this state. We deal with: roads, HOV lanes, buses, rails, ports, airports. And the majority of legislators in this body will tell you that the subjects of education, health care and transportation are now the big three things that our constituents are most concerned about in this state, and not necessarily in any order.

There's nothing that lends itself more to the quality of life and economics of an area than mobility, and I want to thank the Greater Houston Partnership for bringing these important regional issues to you this morning, and I know that when we're going down this road looking at TRIP 2000 and we're going to be looking at a lot of new innovative things to do, not just on how the roads are built -- whether we're going to be bonding, design-build or what -- it's going to be how we're going to do the projects and making them get finished a little earlier.

And I know that's some of the things that our constituents are particularly concerned about, so I am really grateful that the partnership is coming to you today and I know their presentation will be interesting and they can lend themselves and tell you even more about some of these subjects that are near and dear to all of us in Houston and in the whole region surrounding Houston.

So I thank you again this morning and I thank you for your support and the things that you do for the legislature, and certainly your expertise that you bring to us in the Transportation Committee too. We appreciate that.

MR. JOHNSON: Thank you very much.

MR. NICHOLS: Thank you.

MR. JOHNSON: Representative Bill Callegari.

MR. CALLEGARI: Thank you very much. I do appreciate the opportunity to talk to you this morning. I live in the Katy area; I live in Katy about four miles from the Waller County line; I'm in Harris County. And one of the things that I found in my campaign was that people talked more than anything else about the gridlock problem on I-10 and 290 and continue to talk to me when I go back to the district and talk to people. They still talk about the problems that we have getting there.

And I have found, even the short time I've been in the legislature, it seems that it gets harder and harder to get from here to there. When I try to go from Katy to Houston, you almost can't get there. I live between I-10 and 290 and I used to be able to pick one or the other and make my way to Houston easily; now it takes at least an hour and a half to two hours to get in, and that's very, very difficult. It makes people not want to drive and go into Houston at all, and that's not good for this community.

I was with a group of people in Katy yesterday and we talked to the governor briefly about some issues. One of the comments that he made was that he had been in Dallas the day before to talk about the Boeing relocation, and one of the points that he made was that if we don't improve our particularly I-10 situation, we're going to have no success at all in attracting new industries. I think that's extremely critical for us.

You know, the word gets around. We got beat up real badly during the campaign about various issues in Houston and transportation is certainly one of them. So I think you certainly are aware of that.

We really need to do whatever we can to improve that situation as quickly as we can, and I want to emphasize that I think speed is important. If we don't start turning dirt fairly quickly and let people know that we're serious about solving the problem, I think we're going to have a very serious problem here.

Various organizations in the Houston area, Harris County, Fort Bend County, toll road authorities, various groups have spent a lot of time and effort and are spending a lot of money trying to solve the problem, but we need some help from you guys from TxDOT. You know, I certainly would urge you to endorse the Greater Houston initiatives and give us the help that we need to improve particularly I-10, but the whole mobility problems that we have in Houston. Thank you.

MR. JOHNSON: Thank you.

Are there any other elected officials from the Houston area, Houston delegation who want to speak at this time? I don't have a card on any others. I know Senator Lindsay is here, but he's part of the presentation. Is that correct?

SENATOR LINDSAY: I want to speak intelligently about Jim Royer's presentation, so I'm going to wait and hear it.

(General laughter.)

MR. JOHNSON: The Lubbock delegation presentation is next, and Representative Carl Isett.

MR. ISETT: If Senator Duncan is here, I would defer to him.

MR. JOHNSON: I did not see Senator Duncan.

MR. ISETT: The delegation is back there but the senator hasn't made it over yet.

MR. JOHNSON: We'll get him on as soon as he's here.

MR. ISETT: Just tried to defer.

I appreciate you letting us visit with you today about the needs that we have out in West Texas. You know, transportation has always been a major concern in agricultural communities, and the commission has been good enough to let us begin our work on the East-West Freeway.

When you add the fact that we have a major medical center in Lubbock, as well, and a major university, then it compounds the issues that are before you, and the issue today in particular, the East-West Freeway where the work has already begun. I think you've been out there and seen some of the work that we've started: houses have been cleared, the fence has been set back, and now we need to do something about that land which is prepared and ready for it.

I would just say that, as time goes on, these needs become more critical and I think you'll hear from the teaching hospital for the university and our county hospital, and you will see that most of the people who come down that road, whether to our hospitals or to our universities or on over to I-27 to go north, these are all intricately related to what we're trying to accomplish, and we move forward with the Ports-to-Plains Corridor, this is going to be a vital link to that whole process.

So I appreciate your consideration. I'm sorry that Ric Williamson is not here; it's good to see him back in public service; he is missed in the House. Perhaps you can pass on our regards to him. We would appreciate any consideration you would help us with, and I, like the senator, just look forward to the presentations.

MR. JOHNSON: Thank you very much.

Are there any other elected officials from the Lubbock area who wish to speak at this time?

(No response.)

MR. JOHNSON: We will move to the Smith County-Tyler delegation. Senator Todd Staples.

MR. STAPLES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Nichols. It certainly is good to see you this morning. I hate that Senator Brown left; I was going to tell him his constituent has a twin brother in my district. I believe the rest of all of his family might live in East Texas.

(General laughter.)

MR. STAPLES: Listening to the presentation to Mr. Grayson this morning made me think of my work with the district and area personnel of TxDOT in East Texas as a local elected official since the '80s and as a state official. We really have some truly great people who go above and beyond to meet the needs of Texans, and I appreciate their work and I know that you do as well, and they've done a great job.

I'm here this morning as a part of the East Texas-Smith County delegation to speak with you about Priority 1 funding for sections of Loop 49, the outer loop in Tyler and Smith County, and just briefly wanted to talk to you about three points on that particular project.

Smith County and Tyler serves as a regional hub for all of East Texas. You will have county judges that are here today that are not in Smith County that are in support of this loop project because it truly serves an entire region of Texas, and I think that's a key point. Another issue is its connectivity to I-20 and to making certain that the traffic flows continue and this is a major factor in that.

And then thirdly, I think the thing that's unique about this outer loop, it interacts different modes of transportation: it's very near the Tyler Regional Airport, has a great deal of public and private traffic out of there, and so you have inter-connectivity of different modes of transportation, and I think that is a key element that we'd like to ask you to consider as you hear the testimony about Loop 49 in Smith County today.

Thank you for taking the time to serve Texas.

MR. NICHOLS: Thank you.

MR. JOHNSON: Thank you.

State Representative Leo Berman.

MR. BERMAN: Commissioner Johnson, Commissioner Nichols, Mr. Heald. I want to thank you for the opportunity to appear before you this morning in support of the Loop 49 project in Smith County. My name is Leo Berman; I serve in the Texas House of Representatives as the state representative from District 6.

Before I begin my presentation, I know you deal with complaints on a daily basis, and that's all part of your job, but I want to start your morning off with a great compliment. We believe we have the finest district engineer in your TxDOT department right in Tyler, Texas, in Mary Owen, and she and her staff are efficient; they're effective; they're responsive; they're a great representative of TxDOT to the East Texas, and it's really a pleasure to work with her and her staff in East Texas. I just wanted you to know that this morning.

MR. JOHNSON: Thank you.

MR. BERMAN: You bet.

I'm here today to urge you to grant Priority 1 status for the construction funding of the west 5.9-mile portion of Loop 49 from State Highway 155 to State Highway 31. In addition, I am also requesting that TxDOT commit to construct the remainder of Loop 49 west from State Highway 31 to Interstate Highway 20.

In Smith County we've set records in new construction and residential and retail sales for the past four years. We're also a regional hub for retail, medical, educational services, and we have an outstanding growing regional airport. This prosperity is something that we cherish but it's presented us with some unique challenges. At the top of the list is mobility, of course.

We are requesting construction funding for the 5.9-mile section of Loop 49 from State Highway 155 south to State Highway 31 west of Tyler. This is one of the most congested and dangerous areas of Smith County.

Our delegation strongly supports your Texas Trunk System. I've seen it; I support it; I think it's going to be a great addition to Texas. However, the corridor along US Highway 69 from Beaumont to Greenville will create a major bottleneck in Tyler unless the increased traffic created by the trunk system is able to bypass Tyler by way of Loop 49. The strategy of the trunk system cannot be as effective as it could be unless Loop 49 is completed.

East Texas and East Texans strongly support the Loop 49 project, and I respectfully ask you today to grant it a Priority 1 status.

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for this opportunity. I do have one other brief statement to make in support of the City of Whitehouse. I'm also here to endorse the application of the City of Whitehouse as you consider granting preliminary approval of an application from the City of Whitehouse to borrow some $3.4 million from the State Infrastructure Bank for the completion of FM 346 in Whitehouse.

Gentlemen, thank you for the service you do for the State of Texas, and I appreciate the opportunity to be here this morning.

MR. JOHNSON: Thank you.

State Representative Bob Glaze.

MR. GLAZE: Thank you, commissioners. It's certainly a pleasure to be here this morning and be a part of the East Texas-Tyler-Smith County delegation. As you know, I've appeared before in support of their project; I'm here again to urge you to prioritize this to its fullest extent.

I've always thought that, through the years as I've appeared before this commission, that being on the Appropriations Committee and just having recently helped build a $110 billion budget that I had quite a bit in common with this commission because you're doing the same thing: we're prioritizing the spending of the taxpayers' money.

But I have decided that really there's more trials and tribulations than what I have seen, so I'm going to invite you -- I happen to be on the Redistricting Committee, and having been up till midnight last night drawing district lines, I want to invite you to participate in that, and we can both appreciate our jobs better.

(General laughter.)

MR. GLAZE: Being on that committee where we try to prioritize the expenditure, as I say, of the taxpayers' money, and knowing where that comes from and how difficult it is to come by, I know what your problems are, and I know what we're looking at in the future. I know that we don't have all the answers to what we see as we go up and down the highways, and the ones that you'll hear explained to you this morning.

So some of us have to bite a bullet and move toward something that will increase and improve your funding program, and so I'm going to be one legislator who will stand up here this morning and say that I will support whatever means possible to bring about some increased funding -- and that, as you know, is on the table -- and I'll be happy to support whichever way the majority decides, but we must increase funding for your programs across the entire state.

Of course, I still have my highest priority -- as I should in representing this district -- my East Texas area. So thank you very much for your consideration and hearing me.

MR. JOHNSON: Thank you.

Representative Chuck Hopson. Welcome.

MR. HOPSON: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Nichols. Thank you very much for letting me appear. I'm here for support of expansion of Loop 49 from 155 to Highway 31 in Smith County near Tyler.

Let me say, first of all, that I'm very proud here to represent the Smith County delegation. I don't live in Smith County; in fact, Smith County is not even in my district, but Smith County and Tyler are very important to me. I was talking to my wife last night and I said, What's the most you've ever been to Tyler from Jacksonville in one day? And she said, I think I went there three times one day.

So this region is very, very important to East Texas. When we go to town in Jacksonville, we go to Tyler. The Tyler Loop is great; we need an outer loop.

This has truly regional aspects. When we fly out of somewhere, we fly out of Tyler, and the expansion of the loop would really help us a lot.

I appreciate the Smith County delegation coming and letting me talk for them, and I would appreciate anything you can do. Thank you very much.

MR. JOHNSON: Thank you for being here.

Are there any other senators or representatives that would like to speak on behalf of a delegation?

(No response.)

MR. JOHNSON: If there are none, then I would like to ask Jim Royer to come forward and I believe he's going to lead the presentation for the Mobility Partners. Mr. Royer, welcome.

VARIOUS COUNTIES (Mobility Partners)

(Jim Royer, Al Haines, Judge Robert A. Eckels, Senator Jon Lindsay)

MR. ROYER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman; nice to be here. Commissioner Nichols, Mr. Heald, nice to be here. We have a screen hopefully coming down somewhere that we can show this Power Point on, but first I'd like to introduce you to the whole contingent of people who have come down here from the metropolitan area to help present this. So if all the people from the Houston Metropolitan area could please stand up, we'd appreciate it. And we're here to make a pitch.

First, as I'm sure most of you throughout the state know, one of the big issues in Houston is how to maintain compliance with the Clean Air Act, and over the past year, we have worked diligently to put together a state implementation plan with TNRCC and EPA which brings Houston into compliance with the Clean Air Act. However, when we polled out community, we realized the number one issue locally in Houston is mobility, and we felt it very important that not only do we have a state implementation plan to comply with the Clean Air Act but that we have a mobility plan that shows that we can do two things at one time: we can deal with clean air and we can deal with the congestion and mobility issues that face Houston.

We put together a lot of committees to work on this: an executive committee made up of a diverse group of people with diverse opinions about how to deal with mobility; a steering committee that's made up of every association in the metropolitan area that has transportation as one of their to-do lists, and that is a broad perspective of people; and then always, naturally, we maintain a technical committee to make sure the agencies that actually have something to do with this coach us and advise us on what's possible, not possible and how this happens.

And as you can see, Gary Trietsch is on that committee. And I'm sure the district engineer in Tyler is a wonderful person, but I'm also sure that there isn't a better district engineer in the state of Texas than Gary Trietsch and we're very proud with his aggressiveness, his progressiveness, and the way he stays stuck to problems, and we could not ask for a better district engineer.

But this is the committee structure we used to make sure we came up with a plan and program that took into consideration everybody's view of the subject.

The region we were talking about was that eight-county region of Harris County and the surrounding counties, and it was pointed out to me by someone on the steering committee that Dallas County and Tarrant County both fit with inside Harris County to give you a sense of the perspective or the geography that we're dealing with. We're dealing with a large area with more than 4-1/2 million people in it.

The problem we have is that we have about 6.1 million person trips a day; from 1990 to 2000 we grew by over 3,750,000 person trips. That's a result of having a very vibrant, rapidly growing economy that produces tremendous amounts of revenue for the state and our local governments. We account for about 30 percent of the gross state product in the Houston Metropolitan area.

During the period from 1990 to 2000, taking into consideration every transportation mode that was built by TxDOT, the city, the county, Metro, the toll road authority, we met about 40 percent of the demand as it grew for mobility in our region.

Our forecast for the future is that we expect to continue to grow. We have the old oil economy and it is very prosperous and very important to the country right now. We refine 50 percent of the fine chemicals used in the United States, 20 percent of the gasoline consumed in the United States.

We have the new energy business. When they talk in California about where they're going to get their electricity, they're going to buy it in Houston, Texas. It comes from El Paso Energy, it comes from Enron, it comes from Dynergy, it comes from Shell, and we have that industry.

We have the biotech industry around the Texas Medical Center which is the largest medical center in the country by a factor of 5. We gave Compaq Computer, BMC Software -- we expect growth in our area: population, economy, vehicle miles traveled.

The dilemma we have is that we have other issues to deal with rather than just building things. We have the air quality issue, we have other environmental pressures, we have to generate public support for what we do, and as I mentioned, there's a diverse view coming from the steering committee on what are the right solutions to apply. We have demographic and land use changes taking place in our community, and then, naturally, the age-old issue that we could do it all if we just had enough money.

The dilemma we have and the specific problem we'd like to bring to you is while our vehicle miles traveled are growing at a good and steady rate, the investments that TxDOT is making in our region over the past decade have continually decreased to where we're now expected next year to get less than 15 percent of the TxDOT construction and development funds. And as I said, we're roughly 30 percent of the state economy; we're 22 to 25 percent of the vehicle miles traveled and the population, and we need to reverse this trend.

Our number one recommendation in the report is we must receive an appropriate investment from TxDOT in our region. Our region is investing a $1,400,000,000 in our port facilities, supported by Harris County residents only. Our region is investing over $2-1/2 billion in our airport system -- which is one of our two international gateways in this state -- which are City of Houston revenue bonds. We receive no state funds for those facilities, and I'm not here to complain about that; I'm just here to point out that our residents of our metropolitan area make huge investments for the benefit of the state.

That Port of Houston serves the entire state -- serves the country of Mexico, as a matter of fact -- and it is supported by the residents of the Houston Metropolitan area, but we need your investment in our area in order to assist us in dealing with some of our problems.

Now, you are not the only place we're looking to; you are part of our answer, but not our entire answer; we do not look for you to do everything, we look for you to do your appropriate part.

We also support the idea of getting more for you to help us. Right now our current funding level is shown there in red. If we just moved up to something that matched our vehicle miles traveled, we would pick up maybe another $100- or $125 million a year invested in Houston.

But then we also have a legislative agenda, and as Commissioner Nichols knows, and you, Chairman Johnson, know, we strongly support minimizing the diversion from the Gas Tax Fund 6 funding DPS. Our belief is that Fund 6 is for transportation and education and there should be nominal other withdrawals taken from that fund, and we stand ready to work with the legislature and have constantly lobbied the legislature to do that. We support the gas tax relocation point to the rack. We support a lot of programs to get your more resources to deal with the problem.

We also have other recommendations that don't affect you directly, but we must receive a reasonable level of funding from our Federal Transit Administration directly to our community, particularly through our metropolitan transit organization. On the federal level, I'd like to point out that it was the Houston delegation that led the charge to move Texas from getting 70 cents on the dollar back from the federal government to something over 90 cents. That was Tom DeLay, Sheila Jackson, lead Bill Archer who put that issue as a primary issue before a lot of other things were going to be allowed to move in Washington.

The dilemma we have is that TxDOT received a whole lot more federal funding at the exact same time when those funds were diminishing flowing into the Houston Metropolitan area, so while we used all of our federal chits to get that moved, we didn't derive much of a benefit from it directly in our community, again, going back to the idea that we need to have you invest in our community.

We also are going to continue to support local bond issues, and Al Haines, representing the mayor, and Judge Eckels will address that specifically, but across our metropolitan area, all our counties and cities are issuing bond issues to help with our transportation problem. If we do all that, if we get your money, if we get the FTA's money invested in our community, if our local cities and counties continue to put in bond issues, we estimate that we'll get about $43 billion to deal with our transportation issues between now and the year 2022, and that's how that funding breaks down.

We'll go ahead and spend that money, and because we have a large system, it takes a lot of money to maintain and operate it. It takes a lot of money to rehabilitate it, and we get about 25 percent of that $43 billion, or something a little over $10 billion over the next 22 years to add new capacity, and we want to go ahead and do that wisely and we have a whole list of projects that will help do that.

The dilemma we have, though, is that if we do that and invest all that money and increase our investments in our community, that will not deal with the problem because of the strength of our economy. We will grow ourselves into being Los Angeles. Back in the early 1970s Los Angeles was in this situation, and they just kept on doing on, and they became what they are today: the city with the dirtiest air in the country -- despite what you may read in the papers -- and the most congested city in the country. And that program is unacceptable to those of us in Houston.

So while we want to make the investment, we are going to build more, and we are going to do that. We also realize we have to do some other things that are, in a large sense, uniquely upon us. We have to increase the efficiency of our system, we have to bring all the best intelligent transportation systems to bear in our metropolitan area, and we look forward to working with TxDOT and Gary Trietsch on expanding the capabilities of Transtar, along with Metro, the county and the city, and applying all the ITS systems.

We've got general consensus from our elected leadership -- and I believe Al Haines and the judge will address it -- that we need a uniform way to deal with incidents and events in our area. The incidents and accidents that take place on our freeways and clog our freeways can be dealt with much more efficiently. We have a whole myriad of recommendations out of a toolbox of things we can do to increase our efficiency.

The business community is also going to do all that it can do to help manage the demand: alternate work hours, telecommutes, all the modern techniques that will impact the demand and we expect a gain out of that.

We also recognize, though, that we need to affect and impact our urban scheme. We can no longer have one increment of economic growth produce one increment of traffic; we need to have an increment of economic growth produce a half an increment of traffic. We need to start adjusting the work-living relationship, where you live versus where you work. We need to start adjusting the way we look at developments in our community so that mobility is thought of before a project is developed, not afterwards.

Oftentimes we build facilities in our community and find out the traffic impact after it opens and we have a whole bunch of rent-a-cops out there directing traffic and disrupting the flow of things on our major thoroughfares. We need to design traffic systems into our developments, and we're going to put a lot of emphasis on how we get consensus in our community to do that.

As you can see, increasing system efficiency, managing demand, and changing the urban scheme are going to take a continuous coordinated effort on the part of our government structures to implement those programs, but we're committing ourselves to doing that. We are not just looking to TxDOT to fix our problem, although you are an important part of the build-more and develop-more capacity, and we look for your continued investment in this.

The whole list of recommendations start with you, the federal government, our local government to do it better, do it smarter, put together a regional mobility program that we stay stuck to and make sure mobility is always on the top of our list of things to do.

We have a specific request -- and that's always important, Mr. Heald, as you know -- we have about $450 million worth of projects that we believe you could undertake now in the current backlogged program. We have other backlogged projects that can absorb a whole lot of money and produce a whole lot of good in the metropolitan area.

I don't know if anybody other than Commissioner Johnson has driven the Katy Freeway lately, but everyone needs to experience that. That's an embarrassment. It's an embarrassment to all of us that we in a city that is as prosperous as we are and a state as prosperous as we are can have a facility that looks like the Katy Freeway. What we want to do, though, is fix this.

Houston has the fewest number of lane miles per thousand people in our population of any urban area in the country. I know everybody comes here and I work for a lot of these other areas, and they have very important projects that are critical to the economic success of their communities, these communities included, but we are dead last. We are 30 percent of the state's economy; we are a vibrant part of the future of this economy. We build our own ports, we build our own airports, we invest in our own toll roads, and we need your help to get us off the end of this list as being the least-served urban area in the country.

And with that, I'd like to turn it over to Al Haines representing Mayor Brown, and then Judge Eckels is going to address you, and then as Senator Lindsay mentioned, he was going to commentate on the presentation. Al Haines.

MR. HAINES: Thank you, Jim. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, commissioner. It's a pleasure for me to be here representing Mayor Brown and the City of Houston, and endorsing as a full and participating partner the efforts of the Greater Houston Partnership and participation in what we believe to be a comprehensive look at an approach that is far-reaching and indeed represents getting outside of the box in a very significant way to handling our mobility issues.

The City of Houston is committed to doing its share. We're looking forward, for example, to a bond election this fall, and that bond election will include between the borrowing of funds out of our tax-supported debt, as well as participation by Metro, some nearly $700 million in road and street improvements and enhancements to mobility within the city.

We are obviously working very closely with Harris County in looking at ways that we can manage collaboratively the construction of our mobility infrastructure ourselves. We're committed to do that. We've spent over a billion dollars in the last ten years of local taxpayers' money to enhance mobility for our area, but the reality is, as has been presented to you today, it just simply is not enough.

We look forward to working with you as a partner as well as with our representatives in the Houston and Harris County region in making these things become a reality. We appreciate your support, and I turn the time now to Judge Eckels.

JUDGE ECKELS: Mr. Chairman, commissioners, I'm honored to be here today with you and with this delegation. We are, again, from Harris County excited to be a part of the partnership that continues to work on mobility for our region.

A couple of examples of things that this report has picked up on that we have started in the community. The Westpark Toll Road where we partnered with Metro, took some of their right of way, and it was going to be a one-way reversible HOV lane, made it into a four-lane toll facility which will provide better transit use and also relief for Interstate 10, the Westheimer/1093 corridor and 59. It's a better project for everybody and it provides some local funds to help leverage those efficiencies of that corridor.

We are now proposing the same thing on the Interstate 10 corridor. You'll have that later in the commission meeting today and I think you'll be able to consider that. We think that those are the kinds of things where we can come together and partner with TxDOT and provide more for our community, and in fact, let you do your job better in our community.

In the end, we know that there is no single solution but that we can't do it without all of these partners and all of these parties involved, and we're going to very much need your help and your support.

With that I will, again in deference to the time of this commission and the many people you have here, defer back to Senator Lindsay and let him wrap up and let you get on with your business.

And I like the folks from Tyler too, but I will point out one of the reasons our traffic in Houston is so bad is that when you go to town in Houston, you've got a choice to go to town at the Galleria, to go downtown, to the medical center, the museum district, to go to Hermann Park or the zoo, to go out to Katy Mills, to go up to Intercontinental Airport. We are like 100 Tylers located throughout a more compact metropolitan region, and there's lots of places to go and people going there, and the problem will continue to be worse, but the economy will continue to grow and feed not only the Houston region but the entire state.

SENATOR LINDSAY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the time, and as I said, I wanted to stay and listen to and critique the intelligent report that was done by Jim Royer, and it was intelligent and it was intelligently presented too, and I think you did well.

Just to re-emphasize a couple of points, or one point in particular, and that's the fact that the local community is so good about stepping up to the plate and doing what needs to be done and providing funds on their own to support what you do, and the history is there for a long time, and since I've been county judge starting back in 1975, we never fail to pass a bond election, we never fail to pass the issues that are needed to provide funds for mobility. We put up $900 million in ad valorem tax-backed bonds to start the toll road project, and then leveraged that so we could do another $900 million to actually complete the project. So the community has done their thing, and I'm pleased to see that the presentation made by Al and the judge indicate that that will continue into the future, and that's great.

And now, as you probably know -- I know you know -- I also serve as the president of the North Houston Association, and during the board meetings, it was discussed that we needed to come up and make a special presentation ourselves as the North Houston Association on the projects we need in north Harris County. And I said, No, what we need to do really is show that we are joining the rest of the community -- the rest of the community being the Partnership -- and let the partnership take the lead just to show that we definitely are part of the entire community. We're not trying to be parochial.

So we're here, and they agreed with me, and I'd like the North Houston Association group to stand to start with. They are a special part of the delegation that's here, if they would.

I've presented to you a map that does emphasize those projects in the north, but they are just part of the overall things that we need throughout the community, and the Grand Parkway certainly is the biggest one there, and you're all very familiar with that.

So I want to thank you for the opportunity to be here, and again, I support what the Partnership has done, what the City of Houston has done, and certainly what Harris County has done and the surrounding counties with TxDOT.

And you know my agenda, I don't have to tell you my agenda; my agenda has been set out there in the bills that I've presented or the ones that I've not supported and the ones that I have supported. Unfortunately, I can't even get a hearing on the biggest and most important one I've got up there which is the one that would increase the gasoline sales tax, but I'm going to try, and maybe today will pave the way for tomorrow where indeed we can do something like that.

MR. JOHNSON: Senator, thank you for all you do. We know that you're a very trusted ally of the department, and we appreciate everything you have done and your hard work in the future.

Robert, do you have any questions or observations?

MR. NICHOLS: Just several comments. Senator, I know you're probably heading back over to the Capitol. Thank you very much for all the support you've given transportation during this session and I look forward to working with you in between the session on a number of different projects also. Thank you very much.

I'd like to thank you for your report from the Houston group. You have come up over the years with many innovative ideas, not only legislatively but from a transportation standpoint, and we appreciate the support you have put together and the ideas as a region that you have pulled together in support not only of particular projects that affect the area from a regional standpoint, but also for transportation as a whole.

It's been a real pleasure working with you over the last several years, and I know that the proportion or the fair share, or whatever you want to call it, that you're referring to ebbs and tides some with time, and it appears to be a low ebb at the moment. But I think as time moves forward, you'll probably see some improvement in that area.

MR. ROYER: We appreciate that, commissioner, and again, I'd like to thank all of you for your public service. You have a tough job, and if it weren't for the high pay, I know you wouldn't do it.

(General laughter.)

MR. ROYER: And we do understand that it ebbs and flows, and we just think now it's a little bit down and it ought to start to flow.

MR. JOHNSON: My observation is it was a very impressive and eye-opening report. You know, some of these things statistically I was not aware of, and I think it's important that we do get the message out in various forms, and I salute you, Jim, and also the many people who made a special effort to come and had a part in putting together the delegation report. It was an eye-opener and something that we need to be on top of.

MR. ROYER: It was a big effort by the entire community, and our struggle with clean air and our struggle with mobility has made us a better place.

MR. JOHNSON: These are not simple matters dealing strictly with dollars and cents, and I think you're on top of that like no other area in the state. That's important.

MR. ROYER: Thank you.

MR. JOHNSON: I'd like to welcome our newest commissioner, Ric Williamson.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Thank you, Chairman. I apologize for being late; it was department business. And I would like to take this opportunity to thank you and Commissioner Nichols -- member Nichols and the staff for the warm welcome and the preparation for the task ahead.

MR. JOHNSON: Jim, did you want to close?

MR. ROYER: Again, we appreciate your service. We believe and know you're aware of the intensity with which this mobility issue is felt in our community. We're making progress on our own. We need your investment and help to keep moving it along, and we look forward to working with you in the many programs to address this critical issue. Thank you.

MR. NICHOLS: Let me ask you one more question while you're still up there. On a number of the different programs you've discussed in some of your committees, I know the emphasis on toll roads from that portion is a major issue. In the toll equity legislation -- I know there's various things related to that floating -- we've talked some about trying to set up incentive programs, some of us as individuals with some of your groups. Have you talked in some of your committees with some formalized ideas of what you think?

MR. ROYER: You mean congestion pricing, that type of thing, the incentive?

MR. NICHOLS: No, if toll equity passes and we're allowed to put state equity into a toll project, trying to create -- I know there was a concern in some of the large metropolitan areas that communities actually would be penalized, in effect, if more facilities were built as toll roads, and we wanted to try to reverse that concept to try to create, from a positive standpoint, an incentive program.

MR. ROYER: I think our metropolitan area embraces the concept that if there's a road that can support tolls but yet not be completely feasible based on toll revenues, if there's a blended program where TxDOT, the Toll Road Authority -- I think this is what we expect to happen down in the Fort Bend County Toll Road and by TxDOT extending that road further down into the county to generate more traffic to the tolled section and then tying it into an extension into Harris County by the Harris County Toll Road Authority -- we can blend a project and get something on the ground that moves an awful lot of vehicles, offers an awful lot of relief to US 59, for example, and it is that cooperative effort -- and that's what I referred to with Gary Trietsch.

We've found Gary to be very open and very progressive in how to think about this, and that legislation that allows those blended projects we view as very, very important so that we can do this in a partnership with the Toll Road Authority and TxDOT and advance some of these projects, so that's something we support strongly.

MR. NICHOLS: Judge?

JUDGE ECKELS: That's something we view very positively and we have about $3 billion potential toll road projects that we can do, and many of them will not work without support from TxDOT, but with your help we know we can make it happen, and it's very, very enthusiastically embraced by the community.

MR. NICHOLS: Thank you very much.

MR. ROYER: Thank you for your time.

MR. JOHNSON: So that our next delegation can get in place, we'll take a short recess and reconvene in about five minutes and start off with Senator Duncan and the Lubbock delegation. Thank you.

(Whereupon, a brief recess was taken.)

LUBBOCK COUNTY

Lubbock Chamber of Commerce

(Senator Robert Duncan, John Elliott, Jim Courtney, Dr. David Schmidly, Randy Neugebauer)

MR. JOHNSON: We'll reconvene our meeting. The second delegation today has traveled quite a distance to be here, and we're delighted that they are. I know Senator Duncan is here and needs to get back across the street. Senator, welcome and thank you for being here.

SENATOR DUNCAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members. Now you can throw rocks at me today if you like.

(General laughter.)

SENATOR DUNCAN: We appreciate and have enjoyed very much working with you over the years on transportation issues out in West Texas and the district that I represent and in particular in Lubbock. You've been very responsive and you've worked with us very well on many issues.

The issue I think before you today that you're considering or at least is being brought forward by the Lubbock delegation is the East-West Freeway. I think when you were out there about a year ago, we showed you the area there. You have been very responsive to the issues of the fact that we now have condemned most, if not all, of that property that goes through the community and the need for this highway to move along.

I think last time we didn't get into the funding. We skipped a cycle there, and my request -- and I understood the reasons for that. I thought that you were fair in your assessment there, but I also had some concerns that we didn't let that be a signal that we were going to slow down this project, and I don't think we really did slow it down by missing that. I think that we had enough segments of that project approved at that time to move forward, but I think this time is another critical point here where we need to continue to go forward with all or part of the projects that have been suggested as in the next link of the chain, and we just would appreciate very much your consideration of that.

And it sure helps us send a good message to our folks that this is a project that's actually going to be done where we can make progress, and that's what we're asking for you to do today. We appreciate you very much.

MR. JOHNSON: Thank you again for being here, and thank you also for all you do to assist this department.

SENATOR DUNCAN: Well, you have earned it. You do a good job and we appreciate what you do.

MR. JOHNSON: I believe that John Elliott will lead the presentation from the Lubbock area. John, welcome.

MR. ELLIOTT: Thank you, Mr. Johnson. Appreciate your having us in today, Chairman Johnson, Mr. Nichols, Mr. Williamson, and Mr. Heald. We appreciate the opportunity to bring our Lubbock delegation to you today.

I am John Elliott; I am chairman of the Lubbock Chamber of Commerce, and I'd like to just quickly recognize our group here today. We have Randy Neugebauer who is a local real estate developer; we have Dr. David Schmidly who is president of Texas Tech University; we have Jim Courtney who is the CEO at the University Medical Center; and we also have Michael Reeves who is the vice-president of our chamber of commerce.

We didn't have quite as big a charter this morning at the Houston delegation, so we didn't get quite as many people in here.

The East-West Freeway is a project that has been on the minds and been a priority for us in Lubbock for quite some time. We first identified it as one of the top priorities for the city back in 1961. We're very excited that the first actual construction of this freeway is scheduled to be let early in this next year. Lubbock is working to be progressive and address our transportation problems and needs for the future before those needs become a crisis.

We have a slide this morning. The red area that you see there is the area that we're going to be visiting about today. It is, no doubt, a major traffic-generating area in our city. As you look at this slide, you will see that it connects all of the major traffic generators such as Texas Tech University, our new USDA Plant Stress Lab, the University Medical Center and the Texas Tech Health Science Center; others are the Covenant Hospital Lakeside, Covenant Hospital, our new United Spirit Arena at Texas Tech University, Jones Stadium, which is in an expansion mode at this current time, and it is a major feeder to our downtown business community.

As you look at the slide before you, the upper middle left of the slide is the Covenant Medical Center; toward the lake is what we call Covenant Lakeside, and out of the picture toward the left is the University Medical Center and the Texas Tech Health Science Center. These, of course, are our regional medical complex, and again, this segment of the East-West Freeway we're visiting with you about today runs right parallel with those.

Our hospital and medical area include the only Level 1 trauma center and children's hospitals; they also include cancer treatment centers, cardiology treatment centers and transplant centers. It's also a major area for our emergency medical treatment in the Lubbock area. In addition to attracting the patients into these medical centers, they also feed about 9,000 people who work at University Medical Center and the two Covenant hospitals.

I'm going to ask Jim Courtney to step to the microphone for a minute and make a comment in regards to the importance of this East-West Freeway to the medical centers. Jim.

MR. COURTNEY: Good morning. Since I only have a minute, I'll talk fast. I appreciate the opportunity to be here this morning.

As John said, Lubbock is a major medical center, and the East-West Freeway is the major artery that feeds most of the Lubbock medical community. A couple of things that I might add to what John has said, we do a lot of trauma care. University Medical Center is the only Level 1 trauma center west of I-35 in the state of Texas; there are only seven in the state of Texas; we're the only one in West Texas, also, the only regional burn unit.

As a consequence, we serve patients not just from Lubbock but from throughout West Texas and eastern New Mexico, about a 62-county area that comprises a population of roughly 1.2 million individuals, and we receive patients on a routine basis from as far away as El Paso, Abilene, top of the Panhandle, and a good part of eastern New Mexico, as I mentioned.

This project from our perspective is really a matter of public safety. In order for the healthcare community in Lubbock, medical professionals to be able to do our jobs, people have to be able to get to us. Over half of the patients that are served in Lubbock hospitals don't come from Lubbock County; they come from outside of Lubbock, and so the ability to have this project completed is going to be extremely important to us as we continue to try to provide service to the folks of West Texas. Thank you.

MR. ELLIOTT: Thank you, Jim.

As the next slide indicates, we want to thank TxDOT and the commission. They've shown a great deal of commitment to our freeway projects, although we've not had all of our projects obviously completed at this time. The freeway projects won't be laying pavement, as I said earlier, until next year.

A great deal has already been accomplished; our railroads have been relocated -- that project is well under way -- much of the right of way has been purchased and cleared. Unfortunately, the price that we must pay for the progress is a swath of abandoned buildings, as you see here, and vacant lots. Even buildings along the corridor that will not be removed by the freeway are not being leased.

As you can imagine, many business people are not eager to start a new venture in this area as the snarled traffic that will come about will delay any near and future progress there. Once completed, though, we anticipate the freeway will serve as a major economic generator for the corridor but not until it's completed.

We encourage you to continue your commitment and enable us to heal up the incision through the center of our community as quickly as possible. Thank you.

And with that, I'm going to turn it over to Dr. David Schmidly who is the president of Texas Tech University.

DR. SCHMIDLY: Thank you, John.

Good morning, gentlemen. It's a pleasure to be here and talk to you about the importance of the East-West Freeway project to Texas Tech. Texas Tech is one of four major research universities in Texas, but we're the only one in the western part of the state, so our continued growth is vital to the future economic growth and development of the entire region.

We currently have around 24,000 students and about 8,500 employees on our campus, and we're projected to grow that by 10 percent over the next few years. We have a $380 million budget and we've been in a major expansion phase: over $250 million worth of construction projects have taken place on our campus in the last five years. So efficient access to Texas Tech is crucial to our future growth and our ability to continue to serve West Texas and be the major economic engine in that region. We are currently the largest employer in the western part of the state.

We're talking here about the busiest highway inside Lubbock. Virtually every student, faculty and staff member employed at our institution will use this highway. It's also a major artery to all the special events we have on our campus and we serve the entire region in those events as well. On an annual basis we have over 125 events on our campus that will draw more than 5,000 people. They come from all over the region to access things they can only get on our campus.

So I guess in conclusion, I would just simply like to urge that you allow us to proceed with this efficiently in a timely way. It is extremely important to the future of our university and to bringing the university and the Health Science Center together so that we can continue to help West Texas flourish. And I appreciate your time. Thank you very much.

MR. NEUGEBAUER: Good morning. I'm Randy Neugebauer and I am chairman of the metropolitan planning organization for Lubbock. Chairman Johnson, nice to see you again today, and Chairman Nichols -- I mean, Mr. Nichols -- and welcome Commissioner Williamson. Mr. Heald.

Everybody has had an opportunity to brag on their district engineer, and I couldn't let that opportunity go by to let you really know who the best, best district engineer in Texas is, and that's Carl Utley, and we appreciate Carl's support. We work very closely with TxDOT and with our MPO and I think we do good work because of that spirit of cooperation, and I certainly appreciate Carl and his staff and how they work with us.

I wanted to give you a quick thumbnail sketch of where we are with the East-West Freeway as far as funding, and the slide that we have up today let's you know that we've rustled up about $73 million for actual paving for this project, and we've done that by turning a lot of stones.

We've gotten some of that certainly from the commission, and we appreciate the awards that we've gotten in the past. We were able to get a demonstration project when TEA-21 was re-authorized and we were able to get some money from that. The best, best district engineer in Texas was able to come up with some discretionary money to the tune of about $8 million, and then we have, as an MPO, made a commitment of our entire 4(d) funding for two years to plow into this project because it is ultimately the most important project that we have inside the city limits of Lubbock right now.

As you heard these gentlemen say, not only is it important to the community, but the particular segment that I want to talk to you about today cuts right through the integral part of our community.

We divided the project into two projects simply because they're in different categories, and I'm not up on all of the things within the way TxDOT divides projects up, but Wes and his folks tell me that because these compete in two different categories, they divided them into two, but really we look at this project as one project. Because part of it consists of the main lanes and the frontage roads, and that's $22 million, we are committing $6.3 million of urban mobility money to that, and we're asking for FY 2005 and strategic priority Category 12 of $16.5 million.

The second part of the project is the flyover that connects that all together and connects the access to that region, and that's $5.2 million and we're committing $1.7 million in 4(d) money to that project and asking the commission for $3.5 million. When you add those two together, it's a $28 million project, $8 million of 4(d) urban mobility money and asking the commission for $20 million.

And that's a lot of money and we know that, but one of the things we have tried to do, we have worked very diligently, is to divide this project into segments because we understand that we're not going to be able to come in and there's not monies available to say, Here's $250 million; go build the East-West Freeway in Lubbock, Texas. What we've tried to do and we've come to you incrementally is come to you in pieces that make sense.

Unfortunately, the first pieces that we really need to get started on are the most expensive pieces of the pie. The section through Texas Tech which we have received some funding for and was a part of that demonstration project was an expensive segment. We felt like it needed to be balanced with another section that was from east of the campus where there was some depression in the campus portion and being able to move that dirt without having to move that dirt twice.

The other piece of the pie that really needs to be done all at one time is this particular project for two reasons: one, it's more cost-effective to do the flyovers with the main lanes and the frontage roads; and because of the area that it serves, this is really truly the lifeblood of our community, and to cause a long extended disruption in that area breaking this project down into smaller pieces would really be doing the community a disservice. And as one of the gentleman said, it's also a safety issue because a lot of people that are critically ill are brought in through this corridor.

We think in future segments that there is some potential there where we can, maybe begin, as we move west on the East-West Freeway to cut those bites down some and come back to you with smaller pieces of the pie and still stay on a schedule that will complete this project in a reasonable period of time. We've in the past certainly appreciated your interest in this project and we know that you've made a commitment to it, and we just ask you to continue that commitment and help us complete this major thoroughfare in Lubbock, Texas.

Thank you for your time and Mr. Chairman, I'd be glad to try to field any questions that the commission members might have.

MR. JOHNSON: Any questions? Ric, do you have anything? Robert?

MR. NICHOLS: I'd like to thank you for the presentation. You've got a 29 percent commitment from the local, in effect, for this portion of the project, and my hat's off to you; that's a pretty large local vesting. I think I have a question. You might know the answer, but Carl Utley might know the answer, and that is on that piece of the project, that particular phase you're talking about, we have acquired all the right of way, gone through all the environmental -- where are we on the plans and engineering? Have we completed all those tasks or where are we on that? To what level of completion?

MR. NEUGEBAUER: I think I'll let Carl -- I think I know the answer but I'd better let Carl take that.

MR. UTLEY: Right of way on the entire corridor is about 70 percent complete; the portion through the Texas Tech campus, we're in negotiations with them right now to acquire that right of way. As far as plan development, we've got two consultant contracts. The one on the loop, the plans will be completed this year; that's the one we plan to go to contract with early next year. Through this portion right here, we're probably about a year from completion of the plans and right of way also, so they're well within this frame. I think we're talking about 2005 dollars here, and we'll have those plans completed by sometime next fiscal year.

MR. NICHOLS: Okay, that answered my questions.

MR. JOHNSON: Anything else?

MR. NICHOLS: No, thanks.

MR. JOHNSON: Carl, in its entirety, the project would run from -- the East-West Freeway would run from I-27 all the way to the loop.

MR. UTLEY: That's correct, sir.

MR. JOHNSON: And this is, in your minds, the most critical next step, and because of that it's a larger bite because it's more complex.

MR. NEUGEBAUER: Exactly. I think when we sat down and looked at that, the whole project, we began to look at where we needed to start and where we needed to finish up as quickly as we could, and we really felt like from Avenue Q, moving from Q west was the best way to do that, get through Q to the university and then particularly get through the campus and get through that quadrant over to Quaker as quickly as we possibly could, because that's where there's probably the most current development and the greatest potential for redevelopment and that's where our major economic engines are located.

MR. JOHNSON: Thank you. Any other questions or observations? Thank you so much for the presentation. Carl, thank you for traveling a great distance to join the good people of Lubbock. If there are no others, we will take a brief recess so our friends from West Texas can get back to commerce and industry and then we'll start with the Tyler-Smith County delegation. Five-minute recess.

(Whereupon, a brief recess was taken.)

SMITH COUNTY

City of Tyler

(Mayor Kevin Eltife, Judge Larry Craig, Bobby McClenny)

MR. JOHNSON: We will reconvene the meeting. Our third delegation comes to us from the great east part of the state, and we would like to welcome the people from Smith County and Tyler and a few neighbors from Jacksonville who have been here. I think Mayor Kevin Eltife will lead the delegation, and I call on the good mayor to begin.

MAYOR ELTIFE: Thank you, Chairman. Chairman Johnson, Commissioners Nichols and Williamson, and Executive Director Heald, we thank you for the opportunity to appear here today. I'm Kevin Eltife, mayor of the City of Tyler since 1995 and a member of the city council since 1991. And before I go through my scripture, I want to go on record as saying that we love every district engineer throughout the state --

(Pause.)

MAYOR ELTIFE: -- and that we support the gas tax increase so that you won't have to make these tough decisions in the future.

Governor Ratliff could not be here today and we have a letter from Governor Ratliff expressing his support for Loop 49. Senator Cain could not get over here this morning; we have a letter forthcoming from him supporting Loop 49; and Chairman Alexander also has sent us a letter supporting Loop 49 -- he could not be here as well.

We're here today to request that Priority 1 status be granted for the construction funding of the first phase of the southwest 5.9-mile portion of Loop 49 from State Highway 155 to State Highway 31. That phase includes two lanes of an ultimate four-lane controlled access facility. In addition, we would request a commitment from TxDOT to construct the remainder of Loop 49 northwest from State Highway 31 to Interstate 20. Finally, we request that you support the Tyler District's long-range plan that would extend Loop 49 north of I-20 to US 69 north of Lindale, which would complete the US 69 relief route around the Tyler-Lindale Metropolitan area.

The Tyler-Smith County outer loop project, now called Loop 49, has been discussed by local government and business leaders since the late 1960s. In the early 1980s we requested that TxDOT include the outer loop in their project development plan. The Tyler Metropolitan Planning Organization included the loop in its long-range plan in 1984.

Other significant milestones include: 1993, the TxDOT Commission passed Minute Order 102419 which authorized advanced planning for the southern segment of the loop but did not commit funding for further development or construction; 1994, the City of Tyler, Smith County, and a local foundation offered and TxDOT accepted $500,000 for engineering and environmental studies on the west section of Loop 49; as a result, in April of that year, Minute Order 103708 was passed by the commission. In 1996 the technically preferred route for an eight-mile southern section was announced; in 1998 the final environmental impact statement for the southern section of Loop 49 was approved by the Federal Highway Administration with the issuance of the record of decision; 1999, we requested and the commission approved funding for the first 5.5-mile $16 million first phase of this project from US 69 south of Tyler going west to State Highway 155; 2000, the commission approved our request for a two-mile $9.1 million segment from US 69 South going east to Farm to Market 756.

The City of Tyler and Smith County provided $1.6 million of local match for the first phase of construction that could start as early as 2002. The second phase was matched with $1 million from Tyler, Smith County, and the City of Whitehouse, a community of 5,000 located south of Tyler.

Tyler's economy is one of the strongest in Texas. We have set records in new construction, residential sales and retail sales for the past four years; we are the regional hub for retail, medical and educational services. While we are pleased to have this prosperity, it has presented us with some unique challenges.

Our city council views traffic and transportation as the most critical priority for city funds. In 1995 the citizens passed a half-cent sales tax for infrastructure improvements. To date, we have spent or committed approximately $17 million on traffic and transportation projects. This amount includes: $2.5 million for Loop 49 planning, right of way, and construction. All that we have planned will fall short, however, if Loop 49 is not constructed.

Approximately 63,000 vehicles every day travel US 69 and State Highway 31 through East Texas. When they get to Tyler, they are forced into a bottleneck. The primary way to get from one side of the city to the other is Loop 323 which is not a controlled access facility and which currently averages 47,000 vehicles per day. It serves hundreds of businesses as well as providing direct access to four high schools. The majority of the time, Loop 323 is at or exceeding its designed capacity. Level of Service E and F is commonplace on Loop 323.

Many local drivers are finding alternate routes to stay off of Loop 323 and in the process are contributing to a congested and dangerous situation in smaller farm to market roads in the southern parts of the city and county. As a result, according to the statistics published by the Texas Department of Public Safety, rural Smith County roads are among the most dangerous in Texas. We have been near the top of the list for total and injury accidents for the last five years.

The numbers in Tyler are not very encouraging either. Increasing congestion has caused Loop 323 to experience accident rates at 86 percent higher than the state average for divided roadways of four or more lanes. Loop 323 has a rate that is 51 percent higher than the state average for similar highway systems.

The construction of Loop 49 will establish a controlled access facility that will preserve the mobility of Loop 49 and US Highway 69 corridor. It will create a safer and more convenient route for traffic traveling through the Tyler area. It will provide relief for traffic congestion on existing roadways in urbanized Smith County. It will increase mobility and provide improved access, including emergency services, to the southern Tyler-Smith County areas. It will mitigate air pollution concentration in a soon to be non-attainment area; and finally, it will connect to State Highway 64 which will provide access to our new $15 million airport terminal at Tyler Pounds Field. Our airport is the largest in East Texas and serves both the DFW and Houston International hubs.

Finally, we appreciate your support for the development and construction of Loop 49. Our concern is the minute order authority we currently have for Loop 49 West will expire with the receipt of a record of decision from the Federal Highway Administration. This is anticipated by the end of this year. Continued development of Loop 49 will cease without your authorization to proceed.

At this time I would like to introduce Larry Craig, judge of Smith County Commissioners Court.

JUDGE CRAIG: Thank you, Mayor. Mr. Chairman, honorable commissioners and Mr. Heald. I, too, would like to say thanks for allowing me the opportunity to be here, and I -- having been county judge since 1987 in Smith County and having served as chair of a state agency, that being the State Commission on Jail Standards, for over five years -- I understand the vast testimony that's given to you and all the words that fall upon your ears, so I'll try to be brief and try not to be repetitive on what has been said by those that have spoken before me.

We have a number of people here with us today, and our East Texas neighbors have shown a great, great support for our Loop 49 project, and we've provided you with approximately 55 statements of support from counties, cities, school districts, chambers of commerce, major employers and economic development groups in East Texas. Two, especially, I would like to recognize that are here: first is our Smith County Commissioner Andrew Melontree who has been county commissioner, is in his 19th year; and Anderson County judge, Judge Carey McKinney. And with those two, I'd like to ask our entire delegation to stand and be recognized.

Our commissioners court has been supportive of this project since its inception. Since that time we have pledged and contributed $3.7 million, those dollars to be used in planning, those dollars to be used in right of way acquisition, and those dollars to be used in construction funds to help move this project forward.

We very well understand the need to relieve the congestion on Tyler-Smith County roads and streets and to provide a reasonable bypass as part of the Texas Trunk System. Tyler and Smith County has been experiencing tremendous economic and population growth, and especially over the past four years we set all-time records in building permits, in retail sales, home sales, and most importantly, in new jobs created.

This region has recently become a center for multi-state distribution centers, distribution centers such as: Wal-Mart in Palestine on US Highway 79; Lowe's Distribution Center in Mount Vernon on Interstate 30; the Nieman Marcus center in Longview on I-20; Target Stores in Tyler and Lindale on Intestate 20; and Good Year Distribution Center in Terrell also on Interstate 20.

Recently, Tyler-Smith County's home base for Brookshire's Grocery has completed a 350,000 square foot distribution center that serves approximately 135 stores in their system and they employ 10,000 employees throughout their three-state delivery system.

These distribution centers have thousands of employees and they've added literally hundreds of trucks to our highways that pass through Tyler and Smith County every day.

With the economic growth that we've experienced and been fortunate to experience comes population growth. Since the 1960s, when many of our roads were constructed, the Tyler-Smith County MSA has grown from 86,350 to a whopping 174,700, and it's easy to see by the year 2020 we will exceed 200,000 in that MSA. To handle this growth efficiently, we must keep up with the infrastructure, especially the infrastructure that has to do with the movement of people and goods through our roads and through our highways.

The segment of Loop 49 that we're requesting construction funding for is a 5.9-mile section from State Highway 155 South to State Highway 31 West. This is one of the most congested and most dangerous areas in Smith County, and it makes a major contribution to the grim statistics referred to by Mayor Eltife.

Finally, we very strongly support the Texas Trunk System adopted by this commission in 1998. One of the top three priorities at that time was the upgrade of US Highway 69 from Beaumont, through East Texas, through Greenville, connecting with US 380 to Decatur, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex. And I think you can see in that regional map that was shown to you where we're speaking of there. This corridor will serve as a regional relief route and it will take the pressure off of the metropolitan systems in Houston and the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex area.

State Highway 31 from Waco through Tyler is also on Phase 1 of the Texas Trunk System. Both State Highway 31 and US 69 intersect in the very heart of Tyler and Smith County. This will potentially create a bottleneck in the most populous city and most populous county in our East Texas region. Therefore, the investment strategy of the trunk system, as stated earlier, to be successful will have to be able to have a bypass around the city of Tyler.

We currently estimate there's between 12- and 15,000 vehicles a day that contribute to the congestion in our area that are just passing through Tyler going to another destination, and this will only increase as the new trunk system is completed and our region's population continues to increase.

In conclusion, I think this honorable commission can see that the long-term priority that Tyler and Smith County has given to this project is present. Just in the past few weeks, the City of Tyler and the County of Smith have contributed an additional million dollars to this project. This, along with the $2 million that's been committed by the Tyler District in bank balance funds for this Priority 1 project, brings the level of the total local cash match to $3 million or 10 percent of this total $30 million project.

A lot has been said about district engineers today, and I know that this commission is very, very fortunate to have the quality of engineers throughout this great state, and there may be some as good as but I don't think there's any better than Mary Owen and her great staff in Tyler and Smith County. I thank you for being here and allowing me to speak to you.

MR. McCLENNY: Good morning. My name is Bobby McClenny; I'm mayor-elect of Lindale, Texas.

Mr. Chairman, commissioners and staff, greetings from our city, the city of good country living. We have supported the Loop 49 project since its inception. We're located approximately seven miles north of Tyler on Highway US 69 and I-20. We, like a great many other communities in our area, have experienced rapid growth over the last decade. Our population grew by 24.4 percent from 2,500 to 3,100 from 1990 to 2000.

In 1998, Target Stores opened a multi-state 1.7 million square foot distribution center that employs 1,000 people and has 400 trucks a day entering and leaving that facility. We know from recent inquiries that other companies will be locating on the I-20 corridor that runs through Smith County and a part of our city.

The Loop 49 project will alleviate congestion in Tyler and will also provide a relief route for the city of Lindale, as you can see on the map that's displayed. Once the loop reaches I-20 on the west side, plans call for extending it north of I-20 to the north of Lindale where it will reconnect with US 69.

This will then complete the US 69 bypass around Tyler and will permit traffic originating on I-20 near Beaumont to travel through East Texas to the north of the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex on the Texas Trunk System without any kind of major bottleneck. It will also allow southbound traffic on I-35 north of Dallas-Fort Worth to avoid the Metroplex and Houston and route to I-20 at Beaumont.

It is our understanding that under current trunk system policy, the commission does not permit funding for relief routes, but we respectfully request that you consider amending this policy to provide trunk system funding for these proposed bypass routes.

The City of Lindale is prepared to provide a cash match for the next two segments of the loop that will connect it to I-20 and to US 69 north of Lindale. I believe that we as a city understand the regional significance of this project and we are committed to seeing it fully constructed.

Thank you very much for allowing me and others to address this commission. If you have any questions, there may be someone here that could answer that. I'm sure in a delegation the size that came from the Tyler area that there's plenty of expertise out there.

MR. JOHNSON: Mr. Mayor, thank you for being here and thank you for being a part of the delegation, a very informative presentation.

Robert, do you have any questions?

MR. NICHOLS: A couple of questions -- and I'm not quite sure who is going to address them -- but on the first part has to do -- thank you for an excellent presentation and for all of you coming a long ways to get here -- the controlled access, I know how important that is for long-term movement, and that's particularly what we're talking about, and the first phases, as I understand it, are being developed as controlled access. Has a determination been made on the balance of segments that they will also be controlled access? I see Mary nodding yes. And that is supported by the county and the cities.

MR. McCLENNY: Yes.

MR. NICHOLS: Okay. I think that's pretty important. That's part of what happened on the existing loop: as businesses build, it gets plugged up.

The second has to do -- you said Lindale would do a match. Was that a dollar for dollar match with the state?

(General laughter.)

MR. McCLENNY: Absolutely. I think the policy is that it's a 10 percent match on right of way, and we'll do all that we can to help in any other way. We have the ability in our community -- we have community support and I can guarantee you if there's any arms that can be twisted, I'll do a good job of personally seeing that it gets done.

MR. NICHOLS: Second question has to do with the planning status on these remaining segments. I'm a little bit confused -- I know Mary was trying to explain to me in the past -- originally I was thinking these remaining segments were already in Priority 2, but we really only have one of these other segments in a semi-Priority 2. Mary, would you, or anybody else that can explain, we're on some type of special minute order utilizing local discretionary funds or something as opposed to a normal Priority 2 status?

MS. OWEN: Correct. As Mayor Eltife presented that, we have authority by minute order when the local group brought up the match share for the study, and basically we've been using that minute order authorization to proceed to record of decision on this western section from 155 north to I-20, and that's all the authority that we currently have to get this project to the record-of-decision phase.

What we've done -- and we do this occasionally as a district -- is taken the opportunity to pull in available funding under the different categories to pull in a Priority 2 status to hold that project to record-of-decision status, knowing that ultimately we will have to release that money and put it back in the projects that it's originally entitled for. Randy and I have put together a strategy to hold that project, this first phase Priority 1 that we're requesting for that $29 million, as a hold card, keep that project in Priority 2 with district monies, but in actuality, those monies are already allocated into other areas.

MR. NICHOLS: But those remaining segments, at least on the west side of the loop, if they were in Priority 2, then you would add the funding to at least do the environmental work, survey, right of way.

MS. OWEN: Well, we'll be complete with the environmental work, we're looking for Priority 2 to take us into right of way acquisition and plan preparation.

MR. NICHOLS: And then the last segment I'm looking at -- what is that, from 31 to 20? Was that included in that minute order?

MS. OWEN: Yes. The project is being cleared record of decision up to I-20. Does that answer your questions?

MR. NICHOLS: I think so. Thank you.

MR. JOHNSON: Ric, did you have any questions or observations?

MR. WILLIAMSON: No, sir.

MR. JOHNSON: Well, as you're aware, we don't make decisions as delegations appear, but you've planted some excellent seeds and this is a terrific project that needs to get done, and it's a matter of overall funding and the disposition of funds across all 25 TxDOT districts, but I'm optimistic that this is one of those projects, as I say, needs to be done and we need to figure out a way to do it and do it in a seamless fashion. So we'll work with you to get that accomplished, but it might require a little bit of patience; it will require a lot of hard work and teamwork.

Thank you so much for being here. We look forward to your coming back on other occasions. If there's nothing else from the Tyler-Smith County delegation, we'll take a brief recess so they can dismiss themselves and get back to East Texas, and then we'll start the meeting.

(Whereupon, a brief recess was taken.)

MR. JOHNSON: We shall reconvene the meeting. Before we get started, I would like to point out that items 7 and 8(a) on the agenda will be deferred, and as for taking comments during this meeting, anyone who would like to address the commission should fill out a card at the registration table in the lobby.

If you want to comment on an item that is on the agenda, please fill out a yellow card, and if it is not an agenda item, we will take your comments during the open comment period at the end of the meeting and this requires a blue card.

If you have or plan to sign up to speak on the deferred items, you may still do so and we'll take your comments during the open comment period. Regardless of the color of the card, we would request that each speaker be allowed three minutes.

We will begin with the approval of the minutes of our commission meeting in March and the emergency meetings held at various committees before the legislature in April. Is there a motion to approve those minutes?

MR. NICHOLS: So moved.

MR. JOHNSON: Is there a second? Second. All in favor, signify by saying aye.

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. JOHNSON: Motion carries.

Wes, I will now turn over to you for the rest of the agenda.

MR. HEALD: Mr. Chairman, thank you. I might mention to begin with that all the folks that's been bragging on the district engineers has made it very difficult for me to do their performance evaluations.

(General laughter.)

MR. HEALD: Starting with agenda item number 3, Aviation, Dave Fulton. And we're running a little bit behind schedule; I would ask the staff to be ready and move to the front as quick as you can when you're called upon.

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

This minute order contains a request for grant funding approval for 16 airport improvement projects; it also contains a request for cancellation of a previously approved project. Fifteen of the sixteen requested projects are programmed to be funded with federal and local funding; the remaining project is programmed to be funded with state and local funding. The total estimated cost of all projects, as shown on Exhibit A, is approximately $4 million, $3.4 federal, $180,000 in state funding, and approximately $500,000 in local funding.

The final request is from the City of Brenham. The City of Brenham is requesting cancellation of a hangar construction loan approved by the commission on August 31, year 2000. Local circumstances have changed resulting in a postponement of the project; therefore, the loan is not needed at this time. A public hearing was held on April 9, 2001; no comments were received. We recommend approval of this minute order, and we'd be happy to attempt to answer any questions you might have.

MR. JOHNSON: Are there any questions?

MR. NICHOLS: So moved.

MR. JOHNSON: Second. All in favor signify by saying aye.

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. JOHNSON: Motion carries. Thank you, David.

MR. HEALD: Agenda item number 4, Public Transportation, we have three minute orders for your consideration. Margot.

MS. MASSEY: Good morning. My name is Margot Massey; I'm the director of the Public Transportation Division. Item 4(a) is to complete work on the intermodal terminal in San Marcos to be owned and operated by Capital Area Rural Transportation System. This last piece, for which they're requesting $100,000 plus some federal funds, is to put in the proper length rail platform so that Amtrak's customers will be accommodated at this facility. We recommend your approval.

MR. JOHNSON: Any questions?

Is there a motion?

MR. NICHOLS: So moved.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Second.

MR. JOHNSON: All in favor, signify by saying aye.

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. JOHNSON: Motion carries.

MS. MASSEY: Item (b), two of you at least will recall that you saw a similar item --

MR. JOHNSON: Which two?

(General laughter.)

MS. MASSEY: -- saw a similar item, very similar last fall, on this request and we've gotten some additional information. This is a proposed award of $75,000 to continue an inner city bus route between Waco and Tyler. This is the only carrier, Central Texas Trails, that serves that particular route, and without an operating subsidy, they will have to terminate service, leaving the current ridership with limited, if any, alternatives.

This is the first time that we have recommended operating assistance to an inner city private carrier, but we do feel that the circumstances warrant this, and I know that the Tyler delegation in particular was talking about the trunk system, and to me this is analogous that we need to have a trunk system of inner city bus service in this state that we can rely on and maintain. So all of that said, we recommend your approval.

MR. WILLIAMSON: I have a question, Mr. Chairman.

MR. JOHNSON: Question?

MR. WILLIAMSON: I asked my staff to research this generally, Central Texas Trails, the company, and was told that some of these routes, including the one before us, are exclusive, that some of the routes operated by this carrier duplicate routes available in the private sector. Is that the case?

MS. MASSEY: That's correct. This route, they are the only carrier that provides service on this particular route. They had initially -- this was back some months ago -- requested subsidies on two other routes, both of which were also served by another carrier, and we would not recommend those because service is available.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Well, in this matter, Mr. Chairman, and in other matters, I presume that will come before the commission, such as this, do we ever stop and ask ourselves why we would be helping someone on their exclusive problem when they are, in effect, competing with the private sector someplace else within their transportation system? I mean, the thing that pops into my tight-fisted mind is why don't they quit operating in competition with the private sector and shift those funds to maintain this exclusive route. Do we ever ask that question?

MS. MASSEY: Yes, we do. We have a fairly close relationship with the Texas Bus Association which is made up of all the carriers, including Greyhound, and ask difficult questions in both directions. Their response, in general, on those sorts of issues is they're not competing head to head in terms of they're not sending buses down the road one after the other; they're competing within different time slots over the same routes.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Perhaps different customers?

MS. MASSEY: It's a different market share over the same geographic route, but it's not head-to-head direct competition.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Thank you for your answers.

MR. JOHNSON: Margot, my recollection is there were -- how many riders per month? I've got somewhere either 4- or 8,000 maybe total annual.

MS. MASSEY: That sounds about right.

MR. JOHNSON: Maybe it's 4,000 annually, so over the two-year period it would be 8,000, so in essence, I think you look at the subsidy is about $8 or $9 per rider.

MS. MASSEY: Yes, sir. And of course, Central Texas Trails is required by law to put up a like amount. So it is expensive; I agree.

MR. JOHNSON: Is there a motion for approval?

MR. NICHOLS: I was going to make a comment and then I'll make the motion after the comment. The first time this came up was what, nine months a go, a year ago?

MS. MASSEY: I believe it was more like September or October.

MR. NICHOLS: And I know I had concerns because this was kind of the first time we've ever done something like this. I was a little concerned about the precedent, and you went back, looked. I know the bus company looked, the communities looked, and the reality of it was if we do not go in and help in this area, that particular service for that area will be shut down and riders who depend on that will not have an alternate source, as I understand it.

MS. MASSEY: That's correct.

MR. NICHOLS: So now we're back. This minute order only covers the next two years so we'll have time to evaluate it, see how it works; if it doesn't work, we can end it at the end of two years, whatever. With that, I'll so move that we take this action.

MR. JOHNSON: Second. All in favor, signify by saying aye.

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. JOHNSON: Motion carries. Thank you.

MS. MASSEY: Item (c), we're asking your approval for an award of $809,000-plus in Federal Planning Funds for a variety of rural transit planning projects. Unlike bus systems in cities that work with metropolitan planning organizations, this is about the only source of funding to do rural transit planning, and we issued an RFP and have evaluated the proposals as stated on the cover sheet you have and recommend your approval.

MR. JOHNSON: Any questions?

MR. NICHOLS: So moved.

MR. JOHNSON: Second. All in favor, signify by saying aye.

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. JOHNSON: Motion carries. Thank you, Margot.

MR. HEALD: Agenda item number 5, under Administrative Rules, we have one rule review. Margot.

MS. MASSEY: This is me again, speaking on behalf of our sister division, the Aviation Division.

In accordance with the General Appropriations Act a couple of years ago, we have gone through the regular rule review for Chapter 30 dealing with aviation and Chapter 31 on public transportation. The appropriate notice was posted; no comments were received on either chapter, so we recommend your approval of adoption.

MR. JOHNSON: Any questions? Can I have a motion?

MR. NICHOLS: So moved.

MR. JOHNSON: Second. All in favor, signify by saying aye.

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. JOHNSON: Motion carries.

MR. HEALD: Item number 6 is a change or additional funding for an enhancement project in Jack County. I believe Bob Kovar is going to present this, and we have District Engineer Steve Simmons here if you have any questions.

MR. KOVAR: For the record, my name is Robert Kovar; I'm the deputy director of the Design Division.

The minute order we have for you today provides commission approval of an additional $36,000 needed to complete a transportation enhancement project for a pedestrian, bicycle and equestrian trail in Fort Richardson State Historical Park in the city of Jacksboro. During construction, inclement weather conditions and material failure caused a portion of trail to be damaged.

Since the amount of funds for each enhancement project is fixed by minute order, commission approval is now needed for the additional funds needed to reconstruct that portion of the trail damaged. We believe approving the additional Transportation Enhancement Program funds is the most viable method to complete the project and fulfill TxDOT's obligation to local sponsors. We recommend your approval of this minute order.

MR. JOHNSON: Any questions? Is there a motion?

MR. NICHOLS: I so move.

MR. JOHNSON: Second. All in favor, signify by saying aye.

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. JOHNSON: Motion carries.

MR. HEALD: As the chairman has already stated, 7 and 8(a) will be deferred. Moving on to 8(b) and (c), Al Luedecke will be the presenter.

MR. LUEDECKE: For the record, my name is Al Luedecke; I'm director of Transportation Planning and Programming for the department.

Item 8(b), the reconstruction and expansion of Interstate 10, or the Katy Freeway, from the city of Katy to Interstate 610 downtown Houston is a project of significant importance for mobility in the Houston Metropolitan area. The Harris County Toll Road Authority has proposed, if feasible, an innovative funding plan that will provide leverage dollars for expeditious funding and construction of the entire project by the inclusion of toll lanes for the facility. Ultimately, rail may also be an option.

Due to the number of agencies involved and the size and complexity of the funding proposal, it's necessary for the department, Harris County Toll Road Authority, Harris County, and the Federal Highway Administration to develop an agreement which will outline each agency's participation in the project. The minute order presented for your consideration authorizes the executive director to negotiate and develop an agreement with the Harris County Toll Road Authority, Harris County and the Federal Highway Administration that will lead to a funding proposal for the commission's future consideration.

Following the negotiation and development of the draft agreement between the parties, staff will present the proposal to the commission for its consideration and possible approval. Staff recommends approval of this minute order.

MR. JOHNSON: Any questions?

MR. WILLIAMSON: Discussion?

MR. JOHNSON: Yes, sir.

MR. WILLIAMSON: I understand that in our minute order we have specifically said that we will consider various alternatives, and we pointed out that we will include rail. Is that the case?

MR. LUEDECKE: Yes, sir. As a point of interest, in talking to Gary Trietsch, the district engineer, the policy committee for the MPO has put together an ad hoc committee for Interstate 10 corridor development, and one of their charges, is they very quickly look at the potential for toll and transit concepts in the I-10 Corridor, so it's being considered.

MR. WILLIAMSON: I would only want the oral record to reflect that the wording shouldn't imply that we would consider an alternative to the entire project but that rather we would consider alternatives within the project for multimodal options.

MR. LUEDECKE: Yes, sir.

MR. WILLIAMSON: And Mr. Chairman, of course, as always only speaking for myself, I would hope that the department or the commission would begin to, at every turn of the page, express to the department employees and to outside partners from the local communities that we need to be thinking about always including room for other options in our projects.

MR. LUEDECKE: Yes, sir.

MR. JOHNSON: Robert, any questions?

MR. NICHOLS: I have no questions.

MR. JOHNSON: Al, given that there are so many agencies involved and given also that this project is so important to the Greater Houston area, I hope that we will keep it in the middle of our screen in terms of timing to move through these various discussions, approvals, et cetera, so that we do not lose any time, and I hope the other agencies also have this very high on their priority list, because the last thing this project needs -- or any other, for that matter -- is reasons that it takes longer to get done what needs to get done, so I hope that we view it in that regard.

MR. LUEDECKE: We will, and the initiative is a good initiative, and I think there is the sense that we need to move quickly with it.

MR. WILLIAMSON: And echoing the chairman's words, I know that the governor is most interested in us moving to resolve this problem; he understands that the entire southeast part of the state is sort of focused on this project.

MR. LUEDECKE: Yes, sir.

MR. JOHNSON: Is there a motion?

MR. WILLIAMSON: Do I get to move?

MR. JOHNSON: Sure.

MR. WILLIAMSON: I move.

MR. NICHOLS: Second.

MR. JOHNSON: All in favor, signify by saying aye.

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. JOHNSON: Motion carries.

MR. LUEDECKE: Item 8(c), the Interstate 10 Corridor is one of the premier east-west corridors that transverse the country from the Pacific Coast to the Atlantic Coast via the Gulf of Mexico. This 2,400-mile corridor carries a considerable amount of freight that is generated within our country and has the potential to evolve into a major land bridge corridor that would link world trade sea routes. In addition, due to its proximity to Mexico, portions of the I-10 corridor in California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas handle significant amount of our trade with Mexico.

Due to the importance of this transportation facility, the eight states along the corridor and the Federal Highway Administration have determined that a National I-10 Freight Corridor Feasibility Study should be conducted. The department has been selected as the lead agency for the study which will identify and analyze various alternatives to improve freight movements along the corridor.

The feasibility study will evaluate the benefits of deploying a number of alternatives to the I-10 Corridor for commercial vehicles that would assist in alleviating congestion and improving system safety and efficiency and improving opportunities for economic development within the states.

The cost for performing the study is to be shared among the eight states, California, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida, based on a pro-rata share of the I-10 centerline miles within each state. The approximate cost for the entire feasibility study is estimated at $2-1/2 million with Texas' share being approximately $925,000.

The minute order before you approves the department's participation in the study and authorizes the executive director to proceed with the development and coordination for the completion of the feasibility study, and we recommend your approval.

MR. JOHNSON: Any questions?

MR. NICHOLS: So moved.

MR. JOHNSON: Second. All in favor, signify by saying aye.

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. JOHNSON: Motion carries.

MR. HEALD: Thank you, Al. Item number 9, to approve the environmental review of State Highway 45, and I believe Phillip Russell is going to present that to you.

MR. RUSSELL: Good morning, commissioners, Wes and Helen.

The minute order that I bring to you today concerns State Highway 45. State Highway 45 is a proposed controlled access highway extending from Anderson Mill Road in Williamson County to FM 685 in Travis County. Essentially proposed, State Highway 45 will provide the east-west linkage between US 183, Loop 1, Interstate Highway 35, and proposed State Highway 130.

In May of 1998, the Transportation Commission requested the TTA to study and plan for the development of State Highway 45 as a potential turnpike project. As part of the study and planning for State Highway 45, the authority has continued the environmental review process according to the National Environmental Policy Act, the Transportation Code, and the rules of the authority.

A public hearing was held on November 9 of 1999 to receive input on the draft environmental impact statement. After considering public input and other relevant information, the authority prepared a final environmental impact statement and the Federal Highway Administration subsequently issued a record of decision in February of this year.

Pursuant to the authority rules, the Texas Turnpike Authority board of directors has received the public hearing summary, an analysis of the comments, and found that the public hearings for environmental review purposes are complete. Resolution 01-11 from the Turnpike board dated April 4, approves the environmental review and authorizes the TTA staff to request commission approval.

The Transportation Code provides that the commission must approve each environmental review for a potential turnpike project prior to commencement of construction. The minute order that we bring to you today approves the environmental review for State Highway 45 which is being undertaken by the authority, and we would recommend the approval.

MR. JOHNSON: Any questions?

MR. NICHOLS: A comment. I'd like to congratulate you on getting your record of decision. I know there's a lot of work that went into that and a lot of input from a lot of people. My hat's off to you.

MR. RUSSELL: Thank you.

MR. NICHOLS: Unless there's other comments, I'll so move.

MR. JOHNSON: Ric, any questions or comments?

MR. WILLIAMSON: No, sir.

MR. JOHNSON: Second. All in favor, signify by saying aye.

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. JOHNSON: Motion carries. Thank you, Phil.

Commissioners, we have five minute orders having to do with the State Infrastructure Bank loans, and James Bass will lay this out for you.

MR. BASS: Good morning. I'm James Bass, director of the Finance Division. As Wes mentioned, there are five minute orders before you this morning dealing with the State Infrastructure Bank, two of them are for preliminary approval and three are for final approval.

Agenda item 10(a) seeks preliminary approval of a loan to the City of Robstown in the amount of $350,000 to pay for utility adjustments in connection with the upgrading of Farm to Market 1889 between State Highway 44 and Farm to Market 624. In preliminary discussions, the city has requested terms of five years at an interest rate of 3.5 percent, and staff would recommend your preliminary approval.

MR. NICHOLS: So moved.

MR. JOHNSON: Second. All in favor, signify by saying aye.

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. JOHNSON: Motion carries.

MR. BASS: Item 10(b) seeks preliminary approval of a loan to the City of Whitehouse in the amount of just over $3.4 million to pay for the acquisition of right of way and utility relocation expenses for the widening of Farm to Market 346. In preliminary discussions, the city has requested terms of 20 years with a five-year deferment at an interest rate of 4 percent. If granted preliminary approval, we will negotiate for a shorter payback period. Staff would recommend your approval.

MR. JOHNSON: Is that a five-year deferment of just principal?

MR. BASS: Principal and interest. Interest would accrue during that time but there would be no payments is what they had requested.

MR. NICHOLS: When you say you're going to negotiate for a shorter period of time, you're talking about taking the 20 years down to 10 or 15 or something?

MR. BASS: Right, and trying to do away with the deferment, and if they're unable to handle that in the immediate short term, perhaps looking at paying interest only in the first few years. We do have a couple of examples where the applicants are paying interest only.

MR. NICHOLS: So we'll have another round.

MR. BASS: Correct. This is just preliminary approval.

MR. NICHOLS: I so move.

MR. JOHNSON: Second. All in favor, signify by saying aye.

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. JOHNSON: Motion carries.

Just an observation, James. The sense of an entire deferment, both principal and interest, gives me some heartburn. I see where we have deferred principal payments, but I think when we defer both principal and interest, we're probably giving a little too much latitude.

MR. BASS: That would be our opinion as well, and since this is just preliminary, that is what was requested by the applicant and there are no restrictions on what they can request, but since we've been approved to begin negotiations, we will share that viewpoint with them.

MR. JOHNSON: Thank you.

MR. BASS: Agenda item 10(c) seeks final approval of a loan to the City of Bellaire in the amount of $3.18 million to pay for storm sewer management improvements in connection with the rehabilitation of Interstate 610 from north of Braeswood Boulevard to south of Bellaire Boulevard. The city has requested an interest rate of 4.5 percent with a five-year payback period, and staff recommends your approval.

MR. JOHNSON: Any questions? Is there a motion?

MR. WILLIAMSON: So moved.

MR. NICHOLS: Second.

MR. JOHNSON: All in favor, signify by saying aye.

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. JOHNSON: Motion carries. Thank you.

MR. BASS: Agenda item 10(d) seeks final approval of a loan to the City of Robinson in the amount of $130,000 to pay for the city's share of right of way acquisition for widening US 77 from Farm to Market 3148 to Farm to Market 2837. The city has requested an interest rate of 4 percent with a four-year payback period, and staff recommends your approval.

MR. JOHNSON: Any questions?

MR. NICHOLS: So moved.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Second.

MR. JOHNSON: All in favor, signify by saying aye.

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. JOHNSON: Motion carries.

MR. BASS: And the last agenda item for the State Infrastructure Bank, item 10(e), seeks final approval of a loan to the City of Pinehurst in the amount of $360,000 to pay for the relocation of water and sewer utilities in connection with the widening of US Business 90 in Pinehurst. The city has requested an interest rate of 4 percent with a 14-year payback period, and staff recommends your approval.

MR. JOHNSON: Any questions? Is there a motion?

MR. WILLIAMSON: So moved.

MR. NICHOLS: Second.

MR. JOHNSON: All in favor, signify by saying aye.

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. JOHNSON: Motion carries. Thank you.

MR. HEALD: Award or rejection of highway improvement contracts, item number 11, Thomas.

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

Item 11(a)(1) is for consideration of the award or rejection of highway maintenance contracts let on April 3 and 4, 2001 whose engineer's estimated costs were $300,000 or more. The projects are attached in the exhibit; there were nine projects.

We have one project we'd recommend for rejection, the project is in Matagorda County, and I had brought this project to you before where we rejected the bid. The district made some changes to the contract and the contractor included their mobilization in the bid prices, and in some discussions with the district and the contractor, they are going to work on a way to try to figure out how they can better detail the product so the contractor can minimize their costs, and they'd like to go back and make those changes and re-let the project.

Staff recommends award of all projects with the exception noted.

MR. JOHNSON: Any questions?

MR. WILLIAMSON: Discussion? Go ahead, please, Robert.

MR. NICHOLS: I'm sorry.

MR. WILLIAMSON: I just wanted to discuss a matter about this. I talked to you earlier and talked to various other staff members. It will take me a while to become fully educated about how the department goes about its contracting business, and I thank you for educating me a little bit about As and Bs and incentives and disincentives and so forth. Just as a general question, how often do we encourage the districts to use an incentive mechanism for speedier conclusion of contracts, or do we just have general guidelines and allow the district engineers to make those decisions?

MR. BOHUSLAV: We provided guidance to the districts back in 1998 in regard to what types of projects they could include or should include incentives on, and those were projects with very high traffic volumes, projects that affected businesses, and also where you incurred road user costs that you could count, and encourage them to do that. So we've done that and we've done that subsequently: we've encouraged them to utilize incentive/disincentive on projects.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Well, what triggered the question was in looking over the list it didn't seem to me that a large percentage of these awards are related to an incentive contract on time, I speak of. Then I understand that there's some projects that are just so small that it didn't make any difference to do that, and I understand that now. Just as a general observation coming from the outside to the inside, probably over the next few years we're going to need an awful lot of the public's cooperation in providing us the resources we need to rebuild the state, and it probably would help us some to encourage our contractors to finish quicker rather than later, just as an observation.

MR. HEALD: Thomas, let me step in here. What Thomas says is exactly right. I think it was in '98 that we fairly well, I guess, left it up to the district engineers and we encouraged them to look at incentives and disincentives, but to be real honest with you, we've probably not been as aggressive as we need to be, and we'll certainly take a look at that.

MR. WILLIAMSON: And it's not a matter of criticism at all. You know, we're probably going to be asking them to give us a big chunk of their money here in a couple of years and maybe we ought to start thinking about the things we can do to make them want to help us, that's all. And I thank you for the education you've given me.

MR. JOHNSON: Do we have a motion and a second? I've forgotten.

MR. HEALD: No.

MR. WILLIAMSON: I move.

MR. NICHOLS: Second.

MR. JOHNSON: All in favor, signify by saying aye.

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. JOHNSON: Motion carries.

MR. BOHUSLAV: Item 11(a)(2) is for the consideration of the award or rejection of highway construction and building contracts let on April 3 and 4, 2001, and those are shown on the exhibit. And your comments would probably pertain more to this section than they would the maintenance contracts.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Probably so, yes.

MR. BOHUSLAV: There were ninety-nine projects let and we did have our largest dollar amount contract let in this letting -- it's the Dallas High-Five project.

We have two projects we recommend for rejection. The first one is in Garza County, Project 3085. We had two bidders on it; it's 47 percent over. The district would like to go back and reevaluate and look at some cost-cutting measures we could do to try to save some money on that project.

The second project is in Ochiltree County. We had only one bidder on this project, it was 32 percent over. There were some time requirements in the project, scheduling requirements that caused the contractor to increase their prices, and the district is going to go back and re-evaluate that and see what they can do to save some costs there as well.

Staff recommends award of all projects with the exceptions noted. Any questions?

MR. JOHNSON: Any observations, questions?

MR. NICHOLS: I have no questions. I'll move.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Second.

MR. JOHNSON: All in favor, signify by saying aye.

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. JOHNSON: Motion carries.

MR. HEALD: 11(b) Contract Claims, we have one. Mike.

MR. BEHRENS: Mike Behrens, Engineering Operations.

This minute order before you is for a claim settlement for a contract claim filed by Price Construction for Project IM 10-3(84)512 in Kimble County in the San Angelo District. The contractor filed a claim in the amount of $694,629.92 requesting additional compensation due to delays in the testing of materials for hot mix.

The Claims Committee met on January 18, 2001, considered the claim, and offered the contractor a settlement of $202,969.50. By letter dated April 2, 2001, the contractor accepted the settlement offer for this claim, and we recommend approval of this minute order.

MR. WILLIAMSON: You guys were kind of rough on this fellow, weren't you. You're going to give him less than a third of what he wanted?

MR. JOHNSON: That's very generous, commissioner.

(General laughter.)

MR. JOHNSON: Any other questions or observations? I'll entertain a motion.

MR. WILLIAMSON: So moved.

MR. NICHOLS: Second.

MR. JOHNSON: All in favor, signify by saying aye.

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. JOHNSON: Motion carries.

MR. HEALD: Moving into the Routine Minute Orders, and as usual, I'll go through these non-stop unless you stop me.

All of these are under item number 12, the first being 12(a) Speed Zones, establish or alter regulatory and construction speed zones on various sections of highways in the state; next being Load Zones, this minute order revises load restrictions on various roads and bridges on the state-maintained highway system.

(c)(1) This minute order authorizes construction of a new at-grade railroad crossing on FM 1294 in Lubbock. The City of Lubbock has agreed to fund 100 percent of the costs associated with engineering, right of way and construction of the new at-grade crossing, and I believe the railroad company is paying for this. Is that right?

MR. JOHNSON: The city.

MR. HEALD: The city is paying for this, and no cost to TxDOT.

Harris County, this minute order authorizes construction of light rail transit crossings and improvements at various locations from IH 610 South to IH 45 in Houston to be funded by Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County, and Metro has agreed to fund 100 percent of these costs.

12(d)(1) Right of Way Disposition, Purchase and Lease. First is a surplus tract of land, 2.8375 acres in Collin County on State Highway 5 at Spring Creek Parkway in Plano, and we're just basically recommending the sale for the appraisal price.

The next one, 12(d)(2), this minute order provides for the sale of a 1.2343-acre tract of surplus right of way in Collin County off of old FM 2478. I'm not going to get into these details unless you want me to; all of these, I think, are based on appraised values.

Moving on to the next one, being item (3), this minute order provides for the exchange of a .1299-acre surplus tract of -- surplus easement for a new drainage facility in Denton County on FM 3040 at Garden Ridge Road in Flower Mound.

The next, being item(4), this minute order provides for the sale of a .125-acre tract of surplus right of way in Erath County on US 67/377 at Greens Creek southwest of Stephenville.

The next, being item (5), this minute order provides for the sale of a 2.042-acre tract of surplus right of way in Harris County on IH 10 at McKee Street in Houston.

The next, being item (6), this minute order provides for the release of 15 feet of surplus access rights along IH 610 in Houston. And I understand when we sold access rights originally, we sold it for the full length, width, 521.94 feet, and the district at that time chose to reserve 15 feet for safety reasons, and since then I think it is okay that we go ahead and release that 15 feet to the abutting landowner for that original price that had already been paid.

The next, being item (7), this minute order provides for the removal from the state highway system a section of previous alignment of FM 2475 in Van Zandt County on FM 2475.

The next, being item (8), this minute order provides for the sale of a .1446-acre tract of surplus right of way in Williamson County on State Highway 95 at County Road 408 north of Taylor.

Next, being item (9), this minute order provides for the removal of approximately 3.2 miles of right of way from the state highway system in Williamson County that is old FM 973 southwest of Taylor from US 79 South 3.2 miles, and I believe we have a resolution from the County of Williamson asking us to do that.

That moves us to 12(e) Eminent Domain, request for eminent domain proceedings on controlled and non-controlled access highways, and again, I believe there's a list there if you're interested.

And that completes the routine minute orders, Mr. Chairman.

MR. JOHNSON: Any questions about any of the routine minute orders? There being none, we'll entertain a motion.

MR. NICHOLS: So moved.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Second.

MR. JOHNSON: All in favor, signify by saying aye.

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. JOHNSON: Motion carries.

MR. HEALD: Mr. Chairman, we are not asking for an executive session, and we have no requests for comments.

MR. JOHNSON: Very good. If there is no further business before the commission, I will entertain a motion to adjourn.

MR. WILLIAMSON: So moved.

MR. NICHOLS: Second.

MR. JOHNSON: All in favor, signify by saying aye.

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. JOHNSON: Please note for the record, it is twelve o'clock.

(Whereupon, at 12:00 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: April 26, 2001

I do hereby certify that the foregoing pages, numbers 1 through 112 inclusive, are the true, accurate, and complete transcript prepared from the verbal recording made by electronic recording by Sunny Peer before the Texas Department of Transportation.

                        4/30/01
(Transcriber) (Date)

On the Record Reporting, Inc.
3307 Northland, Suite 315
Austin, Texas 78731