TX legislators file 9 new anti-toll bills

[dfwmapper]

State DOT, not state. All the toll and regional mobility authorities in Texas are subdivisions of the state. They just each focus on their own region. ISTHA is basically the Illinois equivalent of one of them - they may be a state agency, but everything they operate is in and around Chicago. OTA has a couple urban turnpikes, but the vast majority of their mileage is rural. And Oklahoma only has 2 metro areas, where Texas has a dozen or so. And wasn't OTA basically forced into building one of the Tulsa turnpikes in order to keep the people there from bitching too much about OKC getting all the roads? I seem to remember reading something about that.

[Revive 755]

And yet in other cities toll roads meeting that description are administered by the state, such as I-355 and the Creek Turnpike (OK-351).

The toll section of I-355 is managed by ISTHA, not IDOT.

EDIT:Dang, too slow tonight.

[Scott5114]

I was of the impression that the regional toll authorities were county or metro council-of-goverments type operations. If they are all state agencies It seems even more interesting that they would be separate.

And wasn't OTA basically forced into building one of the Tulsa turnpikes in order to keep the people there from bitching too much about OKC getting all the roads? I seem to remember reading something about that.

No, the situation you're thinking about was the Chickasaw. OTA wanted to build the Creek and Kilpatrick, but rural legislators wouldn't support the bond package without additional rural mileage. The Cherokee was included in this package, but was generally seen as fulfilling a real need as it bypassed a dangerous section of OK-33. The Chickasaw, however, was seen as an unfortunate side-effect of the political process, which is why it was cut back to two lanes and doesn't meet either of its planned termini.

[wxfree]

RMAs are not state agencies, but are local governments.  A regional mobility authority or regional tollway authority (NTTA) is a political subdivision of the state.  This is the same thing as a city or county or school district (school districts are independent in Texas).  It's a local arm of state government with limited territorial jurisdiction, as opposed to a department of state government, like TxDOT.  Mobility and tollway authorities have jurisdiction over the roadways they own the same way cities and counties have jurisdiction within their boundaries.

NTTA was formed because all of the old Texas Turnpike Authority's assets were in the Dallas area after they sold the Houston bridge to the Houston toll authority.  People around here didn't want the toll money (all from the Dallas area) going to a statewide authority in Austin to disappear.  NTTA was formed to take over the assets and take control over the toll money.  NTTA did really well, building roads and keeping toll rates low, until they were financially sodomized by TxDOT in the Sam Rayburn deal.

RMAs, on the other hand, were intended to relieve TxDOT (the legislation that established NTTA rolled the Texas Turnpike Authority into TxDOT) of the financial burden of building toll roads, with regional authorities paying for them with toll revenue).  But this was a disaster.  RMAs are better at spending hundreds of millions of dollars on administration and studies than building roads, which often require state assistance.

I really think NTTA and HCTRA have done pretty well.  They have sizeable road systems and reasonably warrant their own administrations.  The only RMA that's showing real promise is in Austin where TxDOT is competing in the toll road business.  The two big toll authorities in Texas show potential for efficiency and seem to have systems worthy of separate administration, similar to smaller states' turnpike authorities.

On the whole, I have to believe that proper accounting can separate toll road money from general highway money.  And I believe it's better to fund highways as a system and not as individual sources of revenue.  But once we account for the incredible stupidity of the people we elect to make decisions, I suspect that having separate authorities of sufficient size has the potential to increase efficiency, and that eliminating authorities that don't merit existence is also efficient.

[dfwmapper]

CRRMA (El Paso) has done a fair bit of work as well, including some completed tolled express lanes on Loop 375, more in the works, and adding several (free) direct connectors at the Loop 375/I-10 interchange, plus kicking in extra funding for other TxDOT projects.

[mrsman]

Admittedly, I'm no expert on what goes on in Texas, but it definitely would seem more efficient to have the DOT in charge of all roads, but the political problems are that the drivers are afraid that their toll money would be pushed to other projects that won't benefit them.

A key example is the use of the toll revenue to fund other highways or mass transit projects.

So if there was any credibility and proper accounting, the drivers in Dallas can be assured that their NTTA toll revenue is spent on NTTA toll roads only, then there would not be a need for a separate agency.  But apparently, this is not practical.

[The Ghostbuster]

Have any of the anti-toll bills been successful? Or is it too soon to tell?