Stop The Fifth Interchange
at Mine Lick Creek Road
Cookeville, Tennessee
DEconstructing the Concocted Road Avrice Propaganda IN General
TRANSPORTATION POLICY
Last updated on 29 APRIL 2008
THE NEWS, OPINION AND COMMENTARY NOT AVAILABLE IN THE HERALD-CITIZEN
Welcome to the TOUR website. (Taxpayers Opposed to Useless Roads) This web site is for those people who want better government policy in road building. It is an exploration of the factors and frustrations surrounding the planning and management of transportation infrastructure in the state of Tennessee. Particular emphasis will be on the Proposed Mine Lick Creek Interchange but, there are many projects like this throughout Tennessee. If you pump gas, pass through the state or ride the bus, you are going to be effected by the policies and proceedures of the Tennessee Department of Transportation or TDOT. I believe that better transportation policy is achievable through the ethical treatment of all taxpayers and seek to provide the other side of the story that is not known either through ignorance, blind trust or strategic misrepresentation.
Danny L. Newton
1018 Rose Garden Lane 38501
931-432-5345
PUTNAM COUNTY AND THE CITY COOKEVILLE ABANDON SUIT AGAINST MRS. LYNCH OR JUST A STRATEGIC RETREAT?
E-MAIL: FROM MRS. LYNCH'S DAUGHTER ANNOUNCES ACTION BY THE CITY, COUNTY AND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
|
>>> I was told by my attorney, Robert (Bob) Anderson, that he had received a phone call from Jeff Jones' office stating that they were taking a voluntary nonsuit in the condemantion...so, I don't think there will be a reason to meet next Monday in Circuit Court. We are filing a Partition suit...again...requesting the house and barn and land not to be used for roads. DEFINITION OF NONSUIT ADDED BY TOUR EDITOR: A voluntary nonsuit is an abandonment of his cause by a plaintiff, and an agreement that a judgment for costs be entered against him.INTERNET DEFINITION IS FOUND HERE |
HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE I-81/I-40 UPGRADE MEETING
by Danny L. Newton
23:22 04/21/2008
I told my wife that I was going to a TDOT meeting but when I got there I had the sudden strange feeling that I had stumbled into a Sierra Club meeting with TDOT as the master of ceremonies. Ed Cole, the Chief of Environment and Planning at TDOT started off reminding everyone of how the governor has always had an interest in the health and history of the 550 miles of Interstate from Bristol to Memphis that was to be upgraded some time in the near future. Several members of the Chamber of Commerce showed up to see if anyone was going to mention something about the Fifth Interchange. Steve Copeland was recognizable and also George Halford. The Center Hill Rural Planning Organization also had a representative present.
I have always wondered how TDOT would portray their part in the financial decline of the transportation infrastructure. How would they explain to a governor and a legislature that the Interstate, a major cash cow for decades, was going to need a trip to the vet and this trip was going to spell the end of cheap road access for many years, Mr. Cole got off a wonderfully illustrative story about how his son had just bought a hybrid vehicle and how the elder Mr. Cole almost seemed to enjoy pointing out to the younger Mr. Cole that his choice to buy such a vehicle was simultaneously the right thing for the environment but a choice to pay less for road access in the state of Tennessee. It was almost like we were all discovering this strange paradox all at the same magical moment when, in fact, these warnings about the impact of CAFÉ standards have been around since 1975 and those warnings are only about two years older than his 35 year old son.
Next he launched into the double digit inflation mantra that has been going around to RPO meetings. The truth is there are a few important energy sensitive items that have been rising at double digit rates. The years between 2003 and 2007 have been especially freightening. The current average of the entire basket of highway construction is a little over 7% and on an annualized basis going back to 1987, the average increase per year is 4.27 %. This is above the Consumer Price Index but it is certainly not a double digit number unless you focus only on the last four years. The TDOT long range plan is based on a 3 per cent discount rate. The discount rate accounts for the time value of money. At this rate, it takes 24 years for half of the value of the money to disappear. At 4.27% it takes only 16.57 years for half of the value of the money to disappear. LINK TO FHWA DATA AND DETAILED HISTORIC TABLES
It seems like their defense is going to be that they could not predict the future of gas increases, the way that gas taxes would interact with fuel consumption and the impact of inflation. TDOT seemed to be falling on its sword without one complaint about the legislature and the governor failing to provide the leadership to drag this state to the brink of a gas tax increase that would track the inflation rate.
My ears really perked up when Mr. Cole mentioned "targeting improvements." TOUR has always been for targeting improvements so that the greatest good is obtained for the greatest number. Also TOUR has a history of calling for a suspension of all low quality projects with very low AADT or Average Annual Daily Traffic. TOUR has consistently been against the County Seat Connector Project as envisioned by the legislature and has been against earmarked projects that provided minimal mobility with high dollar inputs. He spoke of the importance of targeting improvements within the context of TDOT falling into a maintenance mode only if something drastic was not done. He estimated that might happen in five to ten years. I suspect that we are already at that point.
The second big question would be: How would the Virginia situation be handled? There is a fear that Virginia would set the pace for this upgrade and that TDOT would be forced either by convenience or some other means into doing the same things that Virginia did about their capacity problems. Even though there seemed to be an overwhelming sense that train diversions were an option to building more lanes, Virginia embraced both options.
The train option in Virginia had been rejected as the sole means of increasing capacity. The reason that both capacity solutions had to be taken at the same time was the finding that local traffic was using Interstate I-81 in urban areas for local trips rather than using it for long distance trips between urban areas. This, of course, is the main reason that the gratuitous addition of Interchanges must be resisted for the long term good of the greatest numbers of travelers and not the short term good of some local goofy economic development project.
The Virginia legislature tried to rescue part of train diversion plan with an infrastructure bank for train related expenses and some seed money.
I don't think anyone at the Cookeville meeting, including the train advocates, were prepared for such a positive report on rail diversions in Tennessee. Those wishing to see an east-west link through Crossville were shown a Benefit / Cost ratio of only 0.10. The other option was to work with the existing path along the Norfolk and Southern had a Benefit / Cost ratio of 5.0.
Immediately alarm bells should have gone off. A project that has a benefit to cost ratio of 5.0 over a 20 year period would easily get financing in the private capital markets. Theoretically, a project with a benefit to cost ratio of 5.0 would have an annual rate of return equal to 24.697% per year. This makes me wonder why the banks and normal capital markets could not handle this. Virginia had discovered that there were substantial legislative barriers at the federal level that prevented benefits to highways from being transferred to rail projects except at railway crossing points.
Benefit/Cost ratios can be misleading, especially if there is no discipline in the comparison of benefits. Sometime intangibles are monetized and placed in the benefit category to make something look better than what it really is. The key words to listen for are "internal" and "external" benefits.
The third question would be asked by several people who were at that meeting and that would be the fate of the Fifth Interchange. In the Initial presentation, Mr. Dike (pronounced Dee-Kay)Ahonatu, representing Cambridge Systematics, said that there was an evaluation of existing plans to upgrade I-40. This, to the Chamber of Commerce, means only one thing: The Fifth Interchange. A question from the RPO also was directed toward interchange improvements that called for a clarification from Mr. Cole. Later in the presentation, it was clarified that nothing the Cambridge Systematics did had anything to do with the Fifth Interchange. This same question was cleverly asked about three different ways to get someone to say that the Fifth Interchange had already been enfolded into the upgrade but nothing like that ever came from any one at TDOT. Nothing was said about interchange improvements near Crossville, even though it got a lot of comments in the last meeting.
Steve Copland(I missed his real title) but known to some as The Grand Phooba of Blue Road Pork Procurement for the Chamber of Commerce, was the only other person in the room who seemed to have a very good grasp on the possibility that this upgrade could wipe out a lot of promises that the Governor and Commissioner Nicely made to do economic development projects throught out the state. His direct question was about additional revenues and Ed Cole stood up to field the question. Even though he asked about the possibility of an increase in gas tax, Mr. Cole jumped in to say the governor would be looking at a revenue package next year.
TDOT needed $1.9 Billion dollars to just do the 132 mile segment of I-40 and they don't make and have never made $1.9 Billion dollars a year in taxes, both federal and state. The state has 1104 miles of Interstate. If all interstates were upgraded by adding two lanes and it took the same $14.3 million per mile, the cost of upgrading the entire Interstate system would be $15.89 Billion dollars. That is ten years of income at the old rate of about $1.7 Billion per year. The only problem is that TDOT needs that $1.7 Billion per year just to do maintenance. It is an extra $1.9 Billion on top of the $1.7 Billion that is required. This means doubling the gas tax either state or federal or combinations of each.
It looks like the long awaited Mea Culpa from the Governors, both Sundquist and Bredesen will never fully come. Next year, Governor Bredesen will have a chance to do for TDOT what he did for TennCare. Gas taxes are regressive and raising them is not popular no matter who is the governor or governor of which state. Even toll roads operated by a state often go unadjusted for inflation for decades out of the political momentum created by convenience.
Without substantial reform of the legislature, meaning an end to the gratuitous earmarking of road projects and the institution of a truly objective system of project selection the next tax increase is also destined for waste and frivolity. TDOT must become as good at maintaining highway capacity as it is maintaining pavement in general. The two missions are not separate. Perhaps there should be some kind of effort toward a minimum construction target for lane miles every year as a foundation of an objective system of project selection.
TDOT must gain a better vision of the future by hiring and supporting those who do such things for a living. They are called accountants. Nothing is more freightening than imagining TDOT in a real negotiation with a professional toll company. TDOT would come out better in a fight with Chuck Norris if they gave Mr. Norris the first two kicks.
TDOT should stand for an audit like any other agency. The last performance audit of TDOT found none of the basic financial problems that we have now even though the problems existed well before 2003. The Bredesen Administration set the new politically appointed Comptroller of the Treasury onto TDOT in 2003 for the purpose of embarrassing the former governor and for the purpose of transforming TDOT into a different kind of agency that was so idealistic that the process of fiduciary responsibility was not required.
In 60 or 70 years the population of Tennessee will double and it is very likely that this infrastructure will still be around and useful. We are going to need twice the lane miles of highway and there is no method or intention of providing that. Shockingly and against all intuition the cost of the individual automobile has actually gone down in inflation adjusted terms. According to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Table 1-17 and the use of an inflation adjustment program, it can easily be proven that the inflation adjusted cost of a new automobile has gone down from 1990 to 2005 by $1364. (2005 dollars). The cost of insurance and financing are a different story.
Japan and Europe have the best train systems in the world but also have congestion problems at the same time. They have much higher gasoline costs because of taxes and other factors. If there is any lesson to learn from Europe and Japan it should be that the more money people have, the more they like their own transportation. High fuel prices do not deter the urge to own and drive a car. A good train system has done very little to stop traffic jams in both places.
RETURN TO TABLE OF CONTENTS LINKSLETTER TO TDOT REQUESTING CLARIFICATION ON TRAIN PLANS
|
>>> "Danny Newton" I went to the TDOT meeting in Cookeville last week and it was revealed that the Crescent Corridor project had a benefit to cost ratio of 5.0. If the benefit to cost ratio were understood as the ratio of ability to pay to the debt, this is a ratio that requires no state subsidy because private investors would love to get terms that good. This would be equivalent to a 24 percent rate of return for 20 years. Has TDOT or Tennessee committed any funds to the Crescent Corridor effort and if so what are the details. Was the calculation on the Trans-Tennessee corridor based upon the theory that the multiple ownerships of track and rolling stock could be worked out without state legislation? Was the money for the Rail Projects originating from the Federal Railway Administration or was this highway money that was going to be used? Danny L. Newton Cookeville, Tennessee |
TDOT RESPONDS TO REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION
REPLY BY JEANE STEVENS
| Mr. Newton:
There are no Tennessee funds committed to Norfolk Southern's proposed improvement of the Crescent Corridor. As you may know, the Virginia legislature did vote to contribute funds to rail improvements there. Their state highway and rail departments (which are separate in Virginia) are currently working with NS on a detailed analysis to determine a list of specific improvements to fund with state dollars. As I understand it, they are basing that decision primarily on which improvements yield the most benefit in terms of freight diversion from I-81. The final report for our current 1-40/81 study will not propose that Tennessee invest in Crescent Corridor improvements. However, it will probably recommend that our state undertake an analysis similar to the one being done in Virginia to see whether there are any specific improvements that would yield a significant benefit. Obviously, Virginia's legislature appropriated funds prior to that sort of study, but I think Tennessee lawmakers would want the analysis before making any decisions. As I'm sure you realize, there are things that the state could do to the highway system, with highway funds, that would have benefit to motorists as well as rail traffic. Grade separations basically eliminate accidents at rail crossings, reduce traffic delays and improve emergency response times because vehicles no longer have to stop at crossings to wait for a train to pass. The train no longer has to slow down at the crossing, which improves its operating time. I don't know the answer to your question about multiple ownerships of track, etc., but I'm copying Teresa Estes, the project manager, to see if she can respond. Federal highway funds could not be used for the proposed Trans-Tennessee corridor. I believe the 2003 State Rail Plan must have assumed that state dollars would be used for that project, and perhaps some sort of low-interest loan from FRA. Along those lines, it's worth noting that a lot of Virginia's funding to NS must have been state dollars, not federal. Federal highway funds can be used for grade crossing improvements and other projects on the highway system, but track improvements, etc. would have to come from the state's General Fund. Regards, Jeanne Stevens |
EMINENT DOMAIN ABUSE SUIT MOVED TO 28 APRIL 2008
NO TIME OR PLACE SET YET
20:01 04/10/2008
TOLL ROAD BILL SB3091 IS ON LIFE SUPPORT
THE BILL IS LEFT BY ITSELF TO DIE IN A SENATE SUB COMMITTEE
00:15 04/10/2008
The possibility that a toll road bill (SB3091) that would approve of looking at other projects in the state might actually pass is diminished, probably because of all the negative phone calls and e-mails generated by bloggers and radio talk stations. All of the financial stresses that caused the consideration of this bill are still in place and there is no call into the undertaker yet. For now, it will be invited to die by neglect in sub committee. Every time a storm passes over Nashville, it would be a good idea to look up and make sure the Transportation Committee is not flying any kites that are connected to bolts in the neck of this toll bill. It could be reanimated at any time.
|
WHOOPSIES ! MRS LYNCH'S DAY IN COURT POSTPONED AGAIN After preparing to meet the County and the City in Court twice, the Lynch defense team will have to wait again for the City and the County to get their act together. This time the city and the county suddenly found a conflict that keeps them from showing up Friday morning. No reason was given. Maybe the city and the county are fighting over who should pay for this legal fiasco? This project is already over budget and according to the write up in the last Putnam County Audit, the County can not share costs 50%-50% once the total project goes beyond $5 million dollars. It was slightly beyond that almost a year ago. 13:35 04/09/2008 |
MORAL IS HIGH ON THE LYNCH LEGAL TEAM
COURT HEARING ON EMINENT DOMAIN ABUSE TO BE FRIDAY, 11 APRIL AT THE SPARTA COURTHOUSE
08 APRIL 2008 2:15 PM
In an e-mail from Linda Owens, Mrs. Lynch's daughter, I was informed that Mrs. Lynch will not be at the court hearing on Friday. The legal team has apparently found some more technical problems with the City/County case and it is highly probable that there will be either a contuination of the matter in another hearing or a resounding defeat for the City and the County as the first utilization of the state's eminent domain protection laws that were passed almost two years ago. The city and the county have recklessly proceeded with this action as if they were unaware of the changes that were made.
Still, the language of the new eminent domain protections law left much to be desired with respect to precision communication. The question now is: Can even the court figure out what the legislature meant by eminent domain protection? Will the court allow the city and the county to reinterpret the meaning of the law in a way that renders all property owners vulnerable to the silliest and unproven economic development schemes?
While it is very clear that the legislature intended to carve out an exception for "industrial" development, industrial developments have turned into sports stadiums, parking garages, airport projects, jails, bad loans to failed retail enterprises, trade schools and a host of other things that do not involve taking material in the front door and a finished product or sub assembly out the back door. At least the workers at these facilities are not classified by the Bureau of Labor Statistics or the Bureau of Economic Analysis as "industrial workers."
Apparently, The Comptroller General has seen fit to approve of nearly any kind of spending as "industrial." Lawrence County, in a 2007 Audit, used Industrial Development Funds as a gift for the Summertown Eagles Booster Club. The Comptroller only complained that the gift, $30,000, was not adequately advertised in the newspaper. The fact that the expenditure had nothing to do with economic development or industrial anything was not even mentioned.
RETURN TO TABLE OF CONTENTS LINKS|
CENTER HILL RPO TECHNICAL COMMITTEE MEETING THURSDAY, 29 MAY, 10:00 A.M. MULTIPURPOSE BUILDING LAKE VIEW DRIVE FAIRFIELD GLADE CROSSVILLE, TENNESSEE |
LETTER FROM RIC FINCH
REMINDER OF THE TDOT MEETING THIS WEEK ON I-81/I-40 UPGRADE
07 APRIL 2008 3:15 PM
|
CARA, TOUR and Neighbors members and friends-- TDOT is holding a second round of public meetings to help determine how it will meet the challenge of growing volume along Interstate 40 and Interstate 81 between Memphis and Bristol....with, obviously, Cookeville right in the line of fire. Will they wind up adding more lanes? You want an 8-lane monster cutting through southside Cookeville? You want a huge swath of destruction from one end of the state to the other? Will they improve alternative routes such as US 70 through Smithville and Sparta to take the pressure off I-40? Will they help the railroads upgrade and create a streamlined piggyback rail service to get a significant percentage of the tractor-trailer trucks off the road? Will they do nothing? You want congestion unimaginable? TDOT has to do something-- the growth in traffic is inexorable. What they ultimately do depends in part on public input. Everyone on this mailing list knows that TDOT under Commissioner Nicely actually listens to public input. Corridor J went to Clay County because Putnam County residents (you!) told TDOT you didn't want it, and Clay County residents told TDOT they did want it. Public opinion matters. We need to help TDOT keep I-40 sane and reasonable for ordinary drivers. Please attend this meeting and speak out or leave written comment cards in favor of upgrading rail service across Tennessee. The rail solution is the best solution. But TDOT needs to see that the public backs this. Meeting details: THURSDAY APRIL 10 5 PM TO 7 PM LESLIE TOWN CENTRE If you cannot attend the meeting, you can still send in coments, which will be accepted ONLY if received no later than May 1, 2008. send your comments to: Project Comments I-40/I-81 Project Tenn. Dept. of Transportation Suite 700, James K. Polk Bldg. 505 Deaderick Street Nashville, TN 37243-0332 For further information on the project, visit: I-40 CORRIDOR LINK If you have questions about this project, contact Ms. Teresa Estes at (615) 253-7689 or e-mail her at Teresa Estes Thank you, Ric |
SENATE PUTS OFF VOTE UNTIL 09 APRIL ON TOLL ROAD AMMENDMENT
THIS BILL AS AMMENDED FROM THE HOUSE HAS PASSED THE SENATE ON FIRST CONSIDERATION
02 APRIL 2008 4 PM
The bill to modify the Tennessee Tollway Act was pulled at the last minute and rescheduled for next week. Steve Gill reported this morning, 03 APRIL, 2008, that the bill did not have enough votes. It is interesting that the summary of the ammendment gives a lot more warning that the elimination of the pilot program provisions gives TDOT permission to toll anything than the actual language of the bill.
RETURN TO TABLE OF CONTENTS LINKSSPEED TRAP LAW PROPOSED
STATE GETS 75%, Cities over 50,000 get 25%
02 APRIL 2008 8 PM
*SB0348 by *Tracy. (HB1290 by *Pinion.)
Traffic Safety - Prohibits a municipality with a population of 10,000 or less from issuing speeding tickets on interstates within the territorial limits of such municipality. - Amends TCA Title 55, Chapter 10, Part 3.
Fiscal Summary for *SB0348 / HB1290
Decrease Local Govt. Revenues - Exceeds $250,000
Bill Summary for *SB0348 / HB1290
Under present law, any municipality with a population of 10,000 or less that is responsible for enforcing traffic laws on portions of the interstate highway system lying inside the jurisdiction of the municipality must comply with the rules promulgated by the commissioner of safety to regulate enforcement of traffic laws. The requirement does not apply to drug interdiction officers employed by the municipality while the law enforcement officers are actively serving with any judicial district drug force.
This bill removes all authority for any municipality with a population of 10,000 or less to issue speeding tickets on the interstate highways, with an exception for municipal law enforcement officers who are serving with a judicial district drug task force.
ON JUNE 4, 2007, THE HOUSE ADOPTED AMENDMENT #2, AS AMENDED, AND PASSED
HOUSE BILL 1290, AS AMENDED.
AMENDMENT #2, AS AMENDED, rewrites this bill to require that 75 percent of all fines and fees collected by a municipality with a population of 50,000 or less as a result of any speeding ticket, whether based on general law or an ordinance incorporating the general law, be deposited in the state's highway fund.
RETURN TO TABLE OF CONTENTS LINKSMRS LYNCH'S ATTORNEY RESPONDS TO AMMENDED SUIT WITH A MOTION TO DISMISS
COURT DATE MOVED TO 11 APRIL 2008 AT 9:00 AM AT THE SPARTA COURTHOUSE
31 MAR 2008 3 PM
The attorney for Mrs. Lynch has filed a motion to dismiss based on an eminent domain precedent set in 2000, Roane County, Tennessee v. Christmas Lumber Co., Inc., 2000. This means that the struggle over the exact meaning of the new law passed by the legislature in the summer of 2006 is not even being used to fight the case yet.
It is no surprise that the county and the city are ill prepared to fight this case since this case was not suppose to be happening in the first place. Mrs. Lynch was suppose to fold and be brought along according to the attorney that represented the other siblings who inherited the Pyle Property. The city and the county have joined together in a form of mass denial that this could possibly be happening. How could anyone want to keep their own property when the government has such wonderful plans for it?
So far, the city and the county have failed to include in their petitions to the court exactly what law they are depending upon to give them the right to take the Pyle Property via eminent domain. This magnifies the problems of the defendant's attorney to prepare for this case.
RETURN TO TABLE OF CONTENTS LINKSLEGISLATURE PUTS DEADLINE ON REPORT AS 01 JAN 09.
ORIGINAL TOLL ROAD GOAL: 28 JUNE 2012 MORE CERTAIN
31 MAR 2008 3 PM
The Tennessee House has passed to the Tennessee Senate a toll bill disguised as a request for information or a change in scope to an existing contract to evaluate toll roads in Tennessee.An amendment was added to change the language of an existing law, the Tennessee Tollway act so that TDOT must have in hand plans for a toll road in mid 2012. The original law had the same due date for design and construction but, the required study had no due date. This time, the legislature is demanding that the study be done and submitted by 01 JAN 2009.
No toll project is going to be done without environmental studies and even if the plans were rolled up and ready to bid, nothing is going to happen without public meetings and this report. The original reports for the authorized studies have been on the TDOT website for months, probably a year. The only thing that was not put out to the public that I know of was the financial analysis which is very detailed and is a very large file. TDOT sent it to me after I offered to send them a jump drive.
The amendment and the bill passed easily 13 voted against it and 3 did not vote. 77 voted for it. The overwhelming vote for the bill came only after the legislature made sure that no foreign interest could get involved in tolling.
The bill forbidding foreign ownership of toll roads was opposed by only three people in both houses of the legislature. This is a clear signal to foreigners that if you are a billionaire newspaper man like Rupert Murdock or an Asian Car company it is OK to come to Tennessee and make a few newspaper or factory jobs. But, if you are from Spain, Australia or Portugal, don't bother to ask. It would be interesting to see how this would play if a Canadian or Mexican company wanted to run a toll road with respect to NAFTA regulations.
There are no domestic companies that can handle projects like this. No foreign or domestic organization would even attempt to come in here and run a toll road unless they had absolute assurances that the legislature would keep its hands off of the cash box. No one would approve an investment grade bond issue until the Legislature backs away from the cash box and its legacy of ridiculous earmarks and failed economic development initiatives.
This toll road proposal would be a pig in a poke. All of the more interesting details would be worked out by bureaucrats in TDOT and by the Senate and House Transportation committee. Some of the more interesting details would be :
(1)How much seed money would be needed to get a toll road started? This money would have to come from a legislative appropriation or the highway fund. Toll studies, already done by Wilbur Smith Associates, show that some money from the state highway fund would have to be used to carry the project through the start up phase as traffic builds.
(2)Who will be in charge of the tolls? The legislature has done a terrible job taking care of the toll system we already have that collects tolls at the gas station. Will tolls move up with inflation or increases in personal wealth? The construction index for highways is closer to 6% per year right now which is above both the personal income increases and the Consumer Price Index. Will there be a firewall between TDOT's pile of cash or will the funds commingle?
(3) Will there be any attempt to make money on the toll road for other non-road expenditures? It is possible that the plan is to turn the toll road into a cash cow that can be butchered for other social and transportation projects. Indiana has done this to send money to remote areas where the gas tax is inadequate to pay the cost of maintaining roads. New Jersey is considering making part of the toll money available for use by government worker pension funds. Massachusetts took a financially stable toll road near the end of its service life and need for tolls and raided its cashbox for the purpose of financing overruns in their Big Dig project.
(4) What if it Fails? This toll road, where ever it is, will be either a financial winner or a financial loser. If the legislature, TDOT and their consultant go into an a trance and their economic development OUIJA board malfunctions, the rest of the successful infrastructure in the state will simply have to carry this fiasco too. The problem is that the declining value of the gas tax collections shrinks the number of lane miles of financially successful infrastructure every year because of inflation. If it is a winner, then it will be business as usual and the legislature will continue to figure out what to do with the excess.
RETURN TO TABLE OF CONTENTS LINKSRIC FINCH COMMENTS ON HERALD CITIZEN PROPAGANDA PIECE FOR NORTHERN LOOP
24 MAR 2008 7:00 PM
|
CARA, Tour, Neighbors and friends, Below is an article that was published in the "I'd Like to Know" column in last Monday's H-C. The answer, based on information supplied by a TDOT rep is good, full of facts. BUT...the TDOT rep failed to mention the second study, published by TDOT in April 2006, assessing the need for the Northern Loop (or "Cookeville Bypass" in TDOT terminology; the so-called Regional Economic Development Corridor proposed by Chamber members). As you know this study found the Northern Loop not justified on the basis of traffic flow or economic development. The study specifically stated that this loop will NOT easy Cookeville's traffic problems. I am sorry the TDOT rep did not see fit to refer to this study, and we have called the H-C's attention to the study in yet another effort to get them to publish the results of this study. We plan to distribute copies of the study to the RPO members at the next meeting, to make sure the RPO understands that TDOT has found no justification for this proposed route. Ric ----- Original Message ----- Please Use this Link Until H-C Gives Permission to reproduce the story. |
TDOT MEETING NUMBER TWO ON THE I-81/I40 UPGRADE IS SCHEDULED FOR COOKEVILLE
by Danny L. Newton
The meeting date for the next I-81/I-40 upgrade has been set for 10 APRIL 2008 and will be held at the Leslie Town Center between 5:00PM and 7:00PM. A comment period will be held open to the public until 01 MAY 2008 but the format will allow public comment at the meeting also. The turnout for the last meeting was quite good. It is standard practive to have a court recorder at these meetings. The Leslie Town Center has good parking and is handicapped accessable.
The Interstate system is critical to the State of Tennessee and is a cash cow with respect to money delivered into the federal and state highway funds. An Interstate with a count of 50,000 vehicles per day will generate about $365,250 dollars per mile per year in a typical traffic count near Putnam County. Traffic on I-81 in Virginia is even higher. This is an inadequate amount of money to maintain this asset. I-40 will cease to be one of the better Interstate Highways in the nation with only a little more neglect.
There is no money for this upgrade unless the state legislature raises the gas tax nearly 10 cents per gallon. A slightly better deal could be crafted if earmarked projects with low daily traffic counts could be eliminated from the RPO and MPO processes all over the state. The state legislature must get rid of the County Seat Connector Program. It would not buy the full I-81/I-40 upgrade but it would be a good down payment. TDOT should cancel all projects with less than 10,000 vehicles per day until the gas tax is raised. No more than 15% of those projects should re-enter consideration after a gas tax increase.
Truck-only toll lanes were rejected in the state of Virginia on their portion of I-81. Some observers felt that local opposition by people who were misusing the Interstate as a local arterial for local trips within the same town mobilized a great deal of opposition to tolls. The burden on the truck companies was also a factor. Trucking companies have been advocates of better roads and do not have a history of being predictably against tolls or taxes provided that the road gives them increased productivity. That means that they have to be at their destination in a reasonable time and within a predictable time frame.
If the increased tax burden is offset by increases in productivity for all Tennesseans, there is no need to fear that the tax increase will take too much out of the economy. Bad transportation systems will tax the citizens in ways that never show up in the law books in Nashville. Already, the number of counties that are using local taxes, including property taxes, to supplement the amount of money that goes into managing the local system of roads is increasing. But, if the increased taxes are used to prop up the existing wasteful and ineffective transportation choices that so easily find their way to the RPO and MPO process,we would all be better off pretending to managing the existing broken system. With the legislature being unwilling to raise taxes, we might at least take some solice in the fact that they are at least wasting fewer dollars every year because of the effects of inflation.
RETURN TO TABLE OF CONTENTS LINKSFIFTH INTERCHANGE TIMELINE
30 SEPT 1988 Herald-Citizen Reports that Vice Mayor Grogan expects Fifth Interchange by the year 2000. Estimate for the interchange is $1 million. The estimated cost of extending Gould drive to the industrial park is $500 thousand.
03 DEC 1998 Cookeville City Council asks TDOT to perform a feasibility study on constructing fifth interchange on I-40 at Mine Lick Creek Road. SPONSOR-JIM SHIPLEY
01 APRIL 1999 The Cookeville City Council asks TDOT to study the Maple Avenue flyover at I-40 as the new Fifth Interchange.
25 OCT 2000 TDOT dates the Interschange Justification Study for Federal Highway Administration Review as part of Corridor J intersection at Mine Lick Creek Road.
20 MAY 2002 Cookeville proposes to move the city limits to the vicinity to surround the Fifth Interchange
21 JUNE 2002 TDOT Advance planning report on the Northern Connector
15 JULY 2003 Tennessee Comptroller of the Treasury releases report to the legislature with reccommendations for objective system of project selection.
AUG 2003 Final Report of Independant Investigation Sanctioned by TDOT. Studies selection process of 15 problematic road projects in Tennessee, Mine Lick Creek Road is one of them.
24 FEB 2003 City of Cookeville approves alternate "A" as Phase I Councilman Sam Sallee asks that The Northern Connector be Considered as Phase II.
22 SEPT 2005 Herald-Citizen reports Highlands Initiative Kickoff with $2million.
OCT 2005 State Transportation Improvement Plan Shows Project #71005 "Construct New Interchange at Mine Lick Creek Road" ROW acquisition marked for 2006 and construction marked for 2008. See Adobe Page 41/99. Estimated Cost is $10.3 million.
DECEMBER 2005 TDOT Provides explaination of the Project Evaluation System
23 MAR 2003 TDOT report reccommends using SR 111, not Mine Lick Creek Road for Corridor J intersection with I-40.
24 MAY 2006 Tennessee Legislature removes protection from land owners when government acts to build roads or build industrial parks. Bill allows transfer of property to private concerns. Charlotte Burkes listed as a sponser.
14 DEC 2006 TDOT Signs the Environmental Assessment
05 JUNE 2006 Tennessee Governor signs bill limiting the ability of the state, county and city to condemn property. PDF FILE HERE
16 JAN 2007 County Commission votes to listen to Mrs Lynch's side of the story and votes down condemnation request.
05 FEB 2007 Center Hill Regional Planning Meeting votes on transportation projects
06 MARCH 2007 TDOT Holds a public Meeting on the Fifth Interchange
01 NOV 2007 Condemnation of Pyle Property on the City Council Agenda. The vote was unanimous.
12 NOV 2007 The County Planning Commission in a voice vote decides to condemn the Pyle Property.
13 NOV 2007 The Cookeville Chamber of Commerce Refused Tour Editor Access to Engineering Report on the Highland Business Park.
14 NOV 2007 The Chamber of Commerce called a little after 5 PM to advise the Tour Editor that they had prepared a copy of the report that is being used to justify the condemdation of the Pyle Property and that it would be available at the front desk.
12 FEB 2008 The Sherrif Served Mrs. Lynch a summons this morning to initiate the condemnation process on her land.
17 MAR 2008 The City and the County ammend their condemnation suit. This will push back the court date into April 2008.
25 APRIL 2008 THE LYNCH FAMILY ANNOUNCE THAT THE COUNTY AND THE CITY HAVE WITHDRAWN FROM LEAGAL ACTION TO PRESS THEIR OUTRAGEOUS EMINENT DOMAIN ABUSE UPON THE LYNCH FAMILY
RETURN TO TABLE OF CONTENTS LINKSCONTACT YOUR TENNESSEE
STATE TRANSPORATION OFFICIALS
House Committee on Transportation
Representative Phillip Pinion, chair ( D - Union City, District 77 - Obion, Lake, and part of Dyer counties)
Representative George Fraley,Vice-Chair ( D - Winchester, District 39 - Franklin, Moore, and part of Lincoln counties)
Representative Bill Harmon, Secretary ( D - Dunlap, District 37 - Sequatchie, Van Buren, Grundy, and Marion counties)
Representative Curt Cobb ( D - Shelbyville, District 62 - Bedford and parts of Lincoln and Rutherford counties)
Represenattive Vince Dean, (R - East Ridge, District 30 - Part of Hamilton County )Representative Henry, The Fifth Interchange, Fincher D - (Cookeville, District 42 - Most of Putnam County)
Representative Dale Ford (R - Jonesborough, District 6 - Part of Washington and Hawkins Counties )
Representative G. A Hardaway, (D - Memphis, District 92 - Part of Shelby County, Midtown and Inner City Memphis; Communities of Orange Mound, Rozelle, Bethel Grove, Glenview, Magnolia, Copper-Young and Lamar/Parkway corridors, part of Binghampton.)
Representative Mathew Hill, ( R - Jonesborough, District 7 - Part of Washington County)
Representative Curtis Johnson, (R - Clarksville, District 68 - Part of Montgomery County)
Representative Phiillip Johnson, (R - Pegram, District 78 - Cheatham and part of Montgomery and Williamson counties.)
Representative Debra Maggart, (R - Hendersonville, District 45 - Part of Sumner County)
Representative Jimmy Matlock, (R - Lenoir, District 21 - Parts of Loudon and Monroe counties.)
Representative John Tidwell, (D - New Johnsonville, District 74 - Houston, Humphreys, Perry, and parts of Hickman and Maury counties.)
Representative Nathan Vaughn, (D - Kingsport, District 2 - Part of Sullivan County)
Representative Eric Watson, (R - Cleveland, District 22 - Meigs, Polk and part of Bradley counties)
Representative Ben West Jr. (D - Hermitage, District 60 - Part of Davidson County - Donelson, Hermitage and Antioch Communities)
Represenatative Leslie Winningham (D-Huntsville, District 38 - Clay, Jackson, Pickett, Scott and parts of Anderson counties.)
You can find all bills, fiscal notes, bill histories and co-sponsors, U.S. mail legislative and district office addresses and streaming video of committee and subcommittee meetings HERE
RETURN TO TABLE OF CONTENTS LINKSSENATE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE:
RETURN TO TABLE OF CONTENTS LINKSSenator Jim Tracy, Chair - R - Shelbyville
District 16 - Bedford, Moore and part of Rutherford counties
Phone: 615-741-1066
Staff Contact: Judi Butler and Clint Hall
Senator Tommy Kilby, Vice Chair - D - Wartburg
District 12 - Campbell, Fentress, Morgan, Rhea, Roane and Scott Counties
Phone (615) 741-1449
Staff Contact: Michelle Stephenson, Brenda Gadd
Senator Jack Johnson, Sec. - R - Brentwood
District 23 - Williamson, and part of Davidson Counties
Phone (615) 741-2495
Contact: Catherine Haire
Senator Jerry Cooper - D -Morrison
District 14 - Franklin, Bledsoe, Coffee, Grundy, Sequatchie, Van Buren, and Warren counties
Phone (615) 741-6694
Staff Contact: Christina Barber
Senator Doug Jackson - D - Dickson
District 25 - Dickson, Giles, Hickman, Humphreys, Lawrence, and Lewis counties
Phone (615) 741-4499
Fax (615) 741-8745
Staff Contacts: Kim Andrews
Senator Rosalind Kurita -D - Clarksville
District 22 - Cheatham, Houston and Montgomery counties
Phone (615) 741-2374
Toll Free (800) 449-8366 Ext. 12374
Staff Contacts: Pamela George and Andrea Smith-Hummel
Senator Steve Southerland R - Morristown
District 1 - Cocke, Greene, Hamblen, and Unicoi counties
Phone (615) 741-3851
Staff Contacts: Carolyn Newman, Loudene Gee
Senator Micheal Williams - I - Maynardville
District 4 - Claiborne, Grainger, Hancock, Hawkins, Jefferson, and Union counties
Phone (615) 741-2061
Staff Contact: Rosalyn Martin
Senator Jamie Woodson - R - Knoxville
District 6 - Knox County
Phone:(615) 741-1648
Staff Contact: Pat Farmer, Alexanderia Honeycutt
YOU MIGHT HAVE A USELESS ROAD IF...
1. The road cost more money than it could ever hope to generate in taxes in a lifetime.
2. The local Chamber of Commerce says it will be good for the economy
3. The Chamber of Commerce organizes a pilgrimage to the Governor's office to tell him that everyone wants it.
4. The local paper tells everybody that if you don't want it your are a NIMBY
5. The local Chamber of Commerce is telling everyone that we have to do this because everyone else is doing it too.
6. The local Chamber of Commerce is claiming that we have to do this to get ahead of everyone else who isn't doing it.
7. TDOT says that it will cure the traffic problems.
8. TDOT says it won't cure the traffic problems.
9. The Chamber of Commerce claims that it will be good for the quality of life.
10. The Chamber of Commerce says it will help get the next factory
11. Your State Representative just thinks you are against it because of a pre-existing oppositional character flaw.
12. The Chamber of Commerce is in secret negotiations with the next whiz-bang company that only needs this road to make the whole deal come together.
13. TDOT is building a four-lane road when a two-lane would still have a high life cycle service level.
14. TDOT is building a road that will damage your business but does not go through your business. (No blood, No foul)