River of Trade Corridor Coalition
River of Trade Corridor
Coalition - Consensus Statement
River of Trade Corridor Coalition
- Objectives
River of Trade Corridor
Coalition - Position Statement
Texas Transportation Commission
November 18, 2004 Reaction to ROTCC
CorridorWatch.org Statement in Response to November 18, 2004 Commission
Meeting
The City of Dallas in
conjunction with other cities, counties and organizations have
created the River of Trade Corridor Coalition (ROTCC) to protect
the traditional NAFTA trade corridor across Texas. A consensus of
intent and objectives were identified at their organizational
meeting in Dallas on September 16, 2004.
This organization has
formed in response to the state's Trans-Texas Corridor Plan, a
plan to divert NAFTA trade traffic away from existing Interstate Highways. These
communities, like CorridorWatch.org, believe that the Trans Texas
Corridor plan will impact millions of Texans, threaten tens of
thousands of companies, risk hundreds of thousands of jobs, and
result in billions of dollars in lost tax revenue. |
River of Trade Corridor Coalition -
Consensus Statement
It is the consensus of the
River of Trade Corridor Coalition (ROTCC) that an initiative be
launched to unify all entitles interested in preserving the trade
industry's use of the historic and traditional Texas NAFTA trade
corridor (the Corridor).
The Corridor Is defined as
the route running from the Texas-Mexico border in Laredo / Webb
County north along IH-35 to the intersection at IH-35E in Hill
County, then northeasterly to the Intersection at IH-20 in Dallas
County, then east to the intersection at IH-635, then north to the
intersection at IH-30, then northeasterly to Its terminus in
Texarkana / Bowie County at the Texas -Arkansas border.
This initiative includes
strategies to increase public awareness of today's urgent
Corridor-related issues facing approximately 10 million people who
live and work in the 61 counties along the existing Corridor and
whose economies are dependent upon the millions of dollars per
year in revenue generated along this route by the trade industry;
create a Texas State Legislative and U.S. Congressional caucus to
work with the coalition and protect the interest of communities
along the Corridor; and to work with the Texas Department of
Transportation (TxDOT) and other departments of the Texas State
government to develop a NAFTA trade corridor plan which supports
the historic and traditional Corridor.
|
River of Trade Corridor Coalition -
Objectives
-
To protect the historic
and traditional NAFTA trade corridor in Texas.
-
To create a coalition of
all cities, counties and organizations, which would be impacted,
should the traditional NAFTA corridor be changed.
-
To increase public
awareness of the Trans-Texas Corridor plan and its potential
impact on communities along the historic NAFTA trade corridor.
-
To create a Texas State
Legislative caucus to work with the coalition and support the
traditional NAFTA trade corridor.
-
To create a U.S.
Congressional caucus to work with the coalition and protect the
interest of communities along the traditional NAFTA trade
corridor.
-
To work with the Texas
Department of Transportation (TxDOT) and other departments of
the Texas State government to develop a NAFTA trade corridor
plan which supports the historic and traditional NAFTA trade
corridor.
|
River of Trade Corridor Coalition -
Position Statement
As a member of the River
of Trade Corridor Coalition, and on behalf of my organization, I
want to register my direct and strong opposition to the
development of any alternative highway or transportation system
that would divert vehicular traffic from and thereby threaten the
traditional and historic NAFTA trade route through Texas. Such a
diversion would directly threaten tens of thousands of small,
medium-sized and large businesses and the hundreds of thousands of
Texas jobs that they have created to service this well-established
International and domestic trade corridor.
The predominant,
traditional and historic NAFTA trade route extends north along
IH-35 from Laredo to San Antonio, Austin, Waco, Hillsboro and
northeast through southern Dallas County along IH-20, then north
along IH-635 to the intersection with Interstate 30 and then
northeast along Interstate 30 to Texarkana and the same in
reverse.
I stand firmly opposed to
an alternative route based upon the following reasons:
-
Every City and County
along the traditional NAFTA trade corridor in Texas has invested
millions (multiple billions collectively) of dollars in bonds
and other Financings and direct expenditures to support commerce
generated by this historic trade corridor. Streets, hospitals,
and schools have been built based upon the projected tax
revenues generated by traffic, trade and commerce along the
corridor.
-
Tens of thousands of
corporations and small businesses have been developed along the
historic NAFTA trade route. The livelihood of these businesses
and their hundreds of thousands of employees depends upon the
traffic traveling this traditional corridor.
-
Businesses operating
along this traditional NAFTA trade route and their employees
have made billions of dollars of private Investments along this
route. These businesses and their employees are the life-blood
of every community located along this route and within the State
of Texas.
-
Development of an
alternative transportation corridor will negatively impact
thousands of acres of productive, taxable land and thousands of
area residents. On the other hand, improving the existing NAFTA
trade corridor will utilize existing state and local assets and
disrupt few if any residents or businesses.
-
Many of us have spent
years and Incalculable time and effort to develop the NAFTA
River of Trade from Laredo to Texarkana via San Antonio, Austin,
and Dallas as a premier economic engine, one of the most
successful economic engines in the state and country.
Redirecting the very traffic and trade commerce that we have
worked so hard to create without close collaboration with local
governments and taxing authorities who are charged by federal
and state law and local charters with providing services such as
education, etc... is not only inappropriate but unconscionable.
-
Other factors which also
bear serious consideration include: the impact on land values
along the existing NAFTA corridor, the loss of sales tax
revenues, the diversion of assets and resources which could be
used to maintain and improve the existing NAFTA corridor, and
the impact that urban sprawl will have upon the areas where the
new Trans-Texas Corridor will be located.
Based upon these and many
other factors, I strongly oppose the pursuit of any alternative
highway / transportation route, including the one under
consideration by TxDOT that would divert traffic and commerce and
thereby adversely impact the traditional and historic NAFTA Trade
Corridor as above defined. I heartily endorse the improvement of
the existing NAFTA Trade Corridor and the improvement of the
interstate highway system already in existence today. I
respectfully request that the State of Texas cease any further
expenditure of State resources on development of the TTC-35 until
such time as it can be authoritatively and independently
demonstrated that said new corridor will not have an adverse
impact on the economies, commerce and economic health and vitality
of the cities and counties now located along the traditional and
historic NAFTA Trade Corridor.
I appreciate your time and
your consideration of these factors as you plan future
transportation systems for the State of Texas.
Note: The
first sentence of this Position Statement has been edited by
CorridorWatch.org. As shown above it accurately reflects the
content of a form letter circulated by the River of Trade Corridor
Coalition to its members. The Position Statement may have been
modified from this original form by individual member
organizations to more accurately reflect their specific concerns
and/or issues. CorridorWatch.org does not represent that any
organization has adopted the Position Statement exactly as
it appears here above.
Please contact individual ROTCC
members to obtain their Resolution or statement of position.
|
Texas Transportation Commission Chairman Ric Williamson
reacts to the
River of Trade Corridor Coalition
at the
November 18, 2004 Transportation Commission Meeting
During Discussion Item (#8), "Status report
on the evaluation of detailed proposals relating to the
Trans-Texas Corridor 35 project (TTC-35)" Chairman Williamson
took the opportunity to express his displeasure with Dallas City
Councilwoman Sandy Greyson, David Dean, Dean International and
anyone else who participates in the River of Trade Corridor
Coalition.
[citation]
With a line of questioning that smacked of a witch hunt,
Williamson wanted to know who was behind the River of Trade
Corridor Coalition and what other members had joined that effort.
Williamson belittled community concerns about protecting their
investments, businesses and industries along the existing IH-35
corridor. He summed up their concern as being about their gas
stations and at cross purposes with the Commission and TxDOT.
[citation]
Williamson directed TxDOT staff that they were
not to provide any further assistance to Dean International or
any organization that associates with Dean
International
(including the River of Trade Corridor Coalition,
High Speed Rail,
and TEX-21) without first checking for his approval.
[citation]
At the close of the TTC-35 discussion
Williamson reinforced his lack of patience with group who oppose
the TxDOT TTC-35 plan. He listed a few
'arguments' he considered legitimate and distinguished them from
others he considered deliberate misinformation or deliberate
opposition to advance some unidentified individual's political
agenda. Williamson continued to express his lack of patience for those groups
he described as "ad hoc, spur of the moment, last minute" that
"spring up for no reason other than, got to find a way to make a
buck and scare people."
[citation]
Download Complete
Discussion Item
5.87MB - MP3 - 51:21
UPDATE
As of 2005 TxDOT has withdrawn its
support, sponsorship, and participation in the Texas
Transportation Summit hosted by the City of Irving,
Texas. The TTS continues to be the largest and best
established transportation forum in the state. In 2006
TxDOT created its own program, The Texas Transportation
Forum. |
|
CorridorWatch.org Statement
It is the position of
CorridorWatch.org that Chairman Williamson's comments and
actions on November 18, 2004, serve to discourage public
participation and input in the state's transportation policy
development. We are distressed by the disregard
for differing opinions.
Elected officials should be given greater voice in
the process as representatives of their constituents, not challenged for
failing to agree with the Commission. The City of Dallas, or any other
Texas community, is not only entitled but has a responsibility to
represent the concerns and issues that effect their jurisdictions. That
representation is often in the form of an advocate such as Dean
International.
It is inappropriate that the Transportation
Commission should be intolerant of honest opinions that differ from
their own. It is unacceptable that this Commission acts to retaliate
against communities, organizations or their advocate because they seek
to organize in opposition to a plan that is itself a matter of public
discourse.
The Commission may be in violation of the National
Environmental Policy Act when such action serves to quell public input
at the very time the agency is conducting a process that requires them
to seek public input. At minimum it demonstrates that opposing
viewpoints and opinions are unwelcome unless declared 'legitimate' by
Chairman Williamson.
|
Texas Transportation Commission Meeting
November 18, 2004
[ Transcript Excerpts ]
Excerpt #1
[full
text]
R. WILLIAMSON: And right now the
corridor swath is wide, the potential routes within the study
we're making is very wide. Does the corridor swath go all the way
over to the edge of, for example, the city of Waco?
MR. RUSSELL: Yes, sir, east and
west, I believe.
MR. WILLIAMSON: And the edge of
the city of Temple?
MR. RUSSELL: Yes, sir.
MR. WILLIAMSON: And the edge of
the city of Dallas? So if
I had a Dallas City Council member such as Sandy Grayson alleging
that the corridor will divert traffic away from Dallas, that would
be an inaccurate statement?
MR. RUSSELL: The decision hasn't
been made yet, the alignment is being selected.
MR. WILLIAMSON: The route could
be right up to Senator Royce West's backyard.
MR. RUSSELL: Yes, sir, it could.
MR. WILLIAMSON: And it could be
right through Senator Kip Averitt's farm, and it could be right at
the edge of the city of Temple, and it could be no further than
State Highway 130 is to Austin right now.
MR. RUSSELL: The only
preclusions, Chairman, that we've gotten so far, there are certain
environmental issues that we've considered to be hands-off, and so
if you look at the second iteration that we're going out in public
meetings now, you can see that the potential corridors have been
snaked through there to miss certain environmentally sensitive
issues.
But beyond that, pretty much
everything is still on the table.
MR. WILLIAMSON:
So an allegation at this
point in time that this corridor is going to divert trade away
from the traditional, and I see it's now become historic, NAFTA
trade route, might be a bit of a stretch.
MR. RUSSELL: Premature.
MR. WILLIAMSON: Might be
premature.
MR. RUSSELL: Yes, sir.
Excerpt
#2
[full text]
MR. WILLIAMSON: Next slide.
Steve Simmons, please.
Are you familiar with an organization known as the
River of Trade Coalition?
MR. SIMMONS: I've seen some
correspondence utilizing that term, yes, sir.
MR. WILLIAMSON:
Who is that, or to
paraphrase that famous line in the Butch Cassidy film, who are
those guys?
MR. SIMMONS:
Well, I believe it's
headed up by the City of Dallas at the time with some help from, I
believe, David Dean or Dean International.
MR. WILLIAMSON: David Dean.
MR. SIMMONS: I believe that is
correct.
MR. WILLIAMSON:
That's the fellow that
spearheads the TEX-21 organization?
MR. SIMMONS: Yes, sir.
MR. WILLIAMSON: Did he use to be
associated with the Historically Underutilized I-35 NAFTA Trade
Route Coalition, or whatever they were called?
MR. SIMMONS: I believe so, yes,
sir.
MR. WILLIAMSON: Whatever
happened to that group?
MR. SIMMONS: I think they're
still in existence.
MR. WILLIAMSON: Does he still
represent them?
MR. SIMMONS: I do not think so;
I don't believe that he does.
MR. WILLIAMSON:
And what seems to be their
point?
MR. SIMMONS: Well, the issue at
hand is they're concerned that the industry and businesses along
the existing I-35 corridor will be impacted severely with a new
alignment away from I-35.
MR. WILLIAMSON: That's reason
enough to not choose a developer and move along, is that their
argument?
MR. SIMMONS: I think that they
believe that the first option should be to consider expanding I-35
and that the corridor should come second.
MR. WILLIAMSON:
Now, is Dean the same guy
that also promotes that railroad, the T-Bone, the high speed rail?
MR. SIMMONS: The high speed
rail, yes, sir.
MR. WILLIAMSON: How many
different hats does he wear in distributing the public's money?
MR. SIMMONS: I'm not aware of
everything that Dean International is involved in.
MR. WILLIAMSON: Do we
participate financially in TEX-21?
MR. SIMMONS: No, sir.
MR. WILLIAMSON: We just go to
all their meetings?
MR. SIMMONS: We are resources
for them to provide information about issues that are pertinent to
the department and transportation in particular.
MR.
WILLIAMSON: I've seen some
awful -- I don't want to say inflammatory but certainly misleading
statements originating from those folks, and I'm a little bit
concerned.
Is there anyone else besides the City of Dallas?
MR. SIMMONS: Well, they're
attempting to bring the issue up to all the cities and counties
along the I-35 corridor, so I'm sure that there will be others
that will be coming along.
MR. WILLIAMSON:
But no other members that
we know of besides the City of Dallas?
MR. SIMMONS: Not that I'm aware
of, no, sir.
MR. WILLIAMSON:
Well, I know that you're
the person in the department that arranges for things such as
TEX-21 and our participation and such. I've got to tell you, and I
only speak for myself in this matter, the other commissioners can
certainly overrule me, but I'm a little bit hesitant to spend any
more time with those guys if they're headed up by the same guy
that's in the business of organizing cities to stand firmly
opposed to the alternative route, because every city along the
traditional -- which has now become traditional historic NAFTA
trade corridor has invested millions in their own commerce.
And I don't see anything in here
about trucks running over people on I-35, I don't see anything in
here about developing a rail system to divert traffic off our
highways; they just seem
to be concerned about, I guess, their gas stations.
Why don't you check with me before we agree to
participate in any more of their stuff. It looks like we might
operate at cross purposes.
MR. SIMMONS: Yes, sir. I
understand your intentions.
MR. WILLIAMSON: Thank you, sir.
Excerpt #3
[full text]
MR. WILLIAMSON: Phillip and
Steve and Amadeo, and for all those who watch,
I don't want to confuse my
direct words about these groups.
It is legitimate to say I'm
opposed to building a highway in green space, because it takes
taxable land off the tax rolls;, that's a legitimate argument, and
a discussion and a debate we should have. It's legitimate to say I
don't want to build any more highways over the Edwards Aquifer
because I believe runoff is damaging the recharge; that's a
legitimate argument and an argument and a debate Texans should
have.
It's a legitimate argument to
say I believe the price of oil and gas will drive us away from the
internal combustion machine in the next 20 years, you'll never pay
the debt off, don't make the decision; that's a legitimate
argument to have.
This governor and the
legislature and this commission, we are not fearful of having
legitimate discussions, debate and arguments about decisions that
have to be made. And as I've said many times before, we've
actually learned some things from some of the anti-corridor folks.
And we've gone back and kind of re-thought how big the corridor
needs to be, and maybe it's not going to be as big as we once
thought.
I distinguish, Steve, that
from deliberate misinformation, deliberate opposition to advance
someone else's political agenda and keep them protected. That's
completely different and there's no room for that in this.
We have some important and difficult decisions that have to be
made about the future of this state. Their arguments should be
about things that are truly in the realm of public policy.
And that's what I want all three of you to convey
to those folks. I don't have any patience for ad hoc, spur of the
moment, last minute groups that spring up for no reason other than
we've got to find a way to make a buck and scare people. I don't
have any patience for that, and I don't have any patience for
people who participate in that.
|
|