Texas Transit Association

Articles added to original posting of two news articles on the Houston rail referendum.

Added Article i:
Foundation clouds comparison of rail donors
By LUCAS WALL Houston Chronicle Oct. 27, 2003

The political action committee supporting Metro’s Nov. 4 transit-expansion referendum raised almost twice as much money in the past month as the committee opposing the plan, campaign finance reports filed Monday show.

Anti-rail campaigners appear to have raised more money overall, however. But it’s difficult to truly compare the dollars being spent for and against the Metropolitan Transit Authority proposition because Texans for True Mobility also maintains a nonprofit education foundation that is not disclosing its donors and expenditures.

TTM contends its advertising merely informs voters that Metro’s plan is a bad idea but does not advocate for voters to cast a “no” ballot. Numerous groups have complained about the secrecy, and the Harris County district attorney’s office is reviewing a Houston Chronicle complaint alleging TTM is violating state ethics laws.

Citizens for Public Transportation, the pro-rail committee, reported raising $321,012 for the monthlong period ending Monday. Its total collections since forming in December are $1.1 million.

TTM’s political action committee reported raising $175,000 in the last month, its first in existence. In an e-mail last week to prospective donors, TTM stated its foundation arm had raised $1.4 million. That would put both TTM entities almost a half-million dollars ahead of the pro-rail side.

CPT’s contributions, ranging from $100 to $25,000, came from 70 businesses and individuals. TTM’s committee contributions, on the other hand, came from only two of the group’s members. Chairman Michael Stevens donated $155,000, and treasurer Edd Hendee gave $20,000.

The pro-rail committee reported spending $722,838 in the past month. Almost half of those expenditures, $311,794, went to Houston’s three major television stations for advertising. The anti-rail committee reported spending $170,283. The bulk of its expenditures, $77,165, went for purchasing radio ads.

TTM’s report reveals its political action committee borrowed $151,000 from the foundation arm — dollars donated anonymously — to start purchasing advertising earlier this month. Stevens then stepped in with the $155,000 donation Monday to repay the loans. The committee’s balance is listed as $4,717.

Chris Begala, TTM spokesman, declined again Monday to reveal who has donated money to the foundation. He also refused to provide the number of donors or confirm the total amount raised and spent.

CPT reported $248,469 in the bank. Its leader, Ed Wulfe, had harsh words for TTM’s continued secrecy.

“I am amazed, absolutely shocked,” Wulfe said at finding out one person donated almost 90 percent of the committee’s money. “They don’t want anybody to know what’s going on. This is an affront to the people of the city.”

Begala said rail supporters are trying to distract voters from the real issue: Metro’s plan is “horrendous” and the authority is in “abysmal” financial shape, including spending millions of taxpayer dollars to promote rail.

“Their comments are likewise as ridiculous as their plan is,” Begala said. “It’s shocking that that’s what they want to talk about when their own contributors are special interests who would benefit from the plan.”

In other Metro campaign activity Monday:

· U.S. Rep. Gene Green, D-Houston, endorsed Metro’s referendum at the Magnolia Transit Center. He touted the plan for improving air quality and reducing the noise level from buses.

· The Business Committee Against Rail held a news conference to raise questions about Metro’s light rail cost estimates, pointing out that planners are considering that an east/west line through downtown might be built in a subway — at least doubling the cost for that segment.

Metro Vice President John Sedlak responded that the east/west line has been designed at street level but could be buried if future engineering deems it affordable and desirable.

Chronicle reporter Salatheia Bryant contributed to this story.

Added Article II:

Eckels touts alternate commuter rail plan
Says system faster, cheaper than Metro’s
By LUCAS WALL Houston Chronicle Oct. 28, 2003

Harris County can build a commuter rail system faster and cheaper than Metro’s light rail plan, Judge Robert Eckels said Monday, releasing a draft of a study for the U.S. 290 and Texas 249 corridors.

Eckels and numerous other Republican leaders are urging voters to reject next week’s Metropolitan Transit Authority $7.5 billion expansion plan. It calls for building $5.8 billion of rail during the next 22 years: 65 miles of light rail as well as an eight-mile commuter line to Missouri City. Metro has no rail proposed to Hempstead or Tomball by 2025.

“There is a lot of potential for commuter rail in this community,” Eckels said at a news conference at Houston TranStar. “We believe it’s a viable alternative to light rail.”

Commissioner Steve Radack, who initiated the commuter rail review, is also against Metro’s plan. But he questioned the release of the study before its completion.

“Waiting until something is done accurately is very prudent,” said Radack, whose precinct includes most of the U.S. 290 corridor. “I’m optimistic. I think it has a tremendous amount of potential. But the study isn’t complete yet, and I’m not one of those people who likes to deal with fantasy or dreams.”

Radack said it’s unwise to present an unfinished study as an alternative to Metro’s transit-expansion referendum, which includes new bus routes, HOV lanes and local roadwork.

Commuter rail utilizes heavy trains, such as those run by Amtrak, and runs at high speeds on freight railroads with an exclusive right of way. Light rail utilizes smaller trains and runs at slower speeds, often on tracks embedded in the street.

The final commuter rail report, which Commissioners Court requested July 29, is due at the court’s next meeting Nov. 4 — the same day voters decide Metro’s transit-expansion plan.

Eckels said he expects the court will authorize a more detailed study looking at other potential commuter rail corridors and moving ahead with plans on who would pay for and operate the first two proposed lines.

“There are 165 miles or more of commuter line candidates in Harris County,” Eckels said while standing behind a model of an East Coast commuter train. One coach was modified with a sticker reading, “Harris County Express.”

A countywide commuter rail network at $5 million per mile could cost less than $1 billion, Eckels said, far cheaper than the $80-million-per-mile light rail system Metro proposes. (Metro’s cost-per-mile figure has been adjusted upward for inflation; the Main Street line under construction costs $43 million per mile).

Metro supporters, however, questioned Eckels’ numbers and dismissed the notion that commuter rail alone is a solution to the region’s traffic problems. They point out a more detailed study of a commuter train to Fort Bend County puts the cost at $14 million to $19 million per mile.

Paul Mabry, spokesman for Citizens for Public Transportation, called Eckels’ pre-election maneuver “an 11th-hour Hail Mary.” CPT is the political action committee campaigning for passage of the “Metro Solutions” plan.

“We want a complete system that does something about the traffic mess we’re into,” Mabry said. “You start by addressing where the traffic is the greatest: down in the urban area. It is not up in Prairie View.”

Metro officials, while supporting the commuter rail concept, pointed out some flaws in the county’s study, including basing construction costs on having only three stations per line, each with 150 parking spaces.

John Sedlak, a Metro vice president, said the transit authority’s Park & Ride lots along U.S. 290 accommodate about 5,000 commuter-bus riders daily. Sedlak noted the county study lacks ridership and fare revenue forecasts.

“We would certainly see commuter rail as being complementary to the Metro Solutions plan but not as an alternative to it,” Sedlak said. “The light rail is very specifically addressing the needs in congested corridors where there are high densities of transit ridership.”

Eckels has urged voters to turn down Metro Solutions and let the county come back next year with a better rail proposal. He said commuter rail could be operating by 2006, much more quickly than Metro’s light rail expansion, the first piece of which wouldn’t start running until 2008.

Most important, Eckels said, is that the larger trains are a better solution to traffic woes.

“Commuter rail is safer and faster, typically, than light rail because it runs in the existing rail corridors separated from traffic so you’re not mixing with the cars on the road,” Eckels said. “It runs where congestion is worse and can provide alternates for relief on congested freeways.”

Article I:
Foundation clouds comparison of rail donors
By LUCAS WALL Houston Chronicle Oct. 27, 2003

The political action committee supporting Metro’s Nov. 4 transit-expansion referendum raised almost twice as much money in the past month as the committee opposing the plan, campaign finance reports filed Monday show.

Anti-rail campaigners appear to have raised more money overall, however. But it’s difficult to truly compare the dollars being spent for and against the Metropolitan Transit Authority proposition because Texans for True Mobility also maintains a nonprofit education foundation that is not disclosing its donors and expenditures.

TTM contends its advertising merely informs voters that Metro’s plan is a bad idea but does not advocate for voters to cast a “no” ballot. Numerous groups have complained about the secrecy, and the Harris County district attorney’s office is reviewing a Houston Chronicle complaint alleging TTM is violating state ethics laws.

Citizens for Public Transportation, the pro-rail committee, reported raising $321,012 for the monthlong period ending Monday. Its total collections since forming in December are $1.1 million.

TTM’s political action committee reported raising $175,000 in the last month, its first in existence. In an e-mail last week to prospective donors, TTM stated its foundation arm had raised $1.4 million. That would put both TTM entities almost a half-million dollars ahead of the pro-rail side.

CPT’s contributions, ranging from $100 to $25,000, came from 70 businesses and individuals. TTM’s committee contributions, on the other hand, came from only two of the group’s members. Chairman Michael Stevens donated $155,000, and treasurer Edd Hendee gave $20,000.

The pro-rail committee reported spending $722,838 in the past month. Almost half of those expenditures, $311,794, went to Houston’s three major television stations for advertising. The anti-rail committee reported spending $170,283. The bulk of its expenditures, $77,165, went for purchasing radio ads.

TTM’s report reveals its political action committee borrowed $151,000 from the foundation arm — dollars donated anonymously — to start purchasing advertising earlier this month. Stevens then stepped in with the $155,000 donation Monday to repay the loans. The committee’s balance is listed as $4,717.

Chris Begala, TTM spokesman, declined again Monday to reveal who has donated money to the foundation. He also refused to provide the number of donors or confirm the total amount raised and spent.

CPT reported $248,469 in the bank. Its leader, Ed Wulfe, had harsh words for TTM’s continued secrecy.

“I am amazed, absolutely shocked,” Wulfe said at finding out one person donated almost 90 percent of the committee’s money. “They don’t want anybody to know what’s going on. This is an affront to the people of the city.”

Begala said rail supporters are trying to distract voters from the real issue: Metro’s plan is “horrendous” and the authority is in “abysmal” financial shape, including spending millions of taxpayer dollars to promote rail.

“Their comments are likewise as ridiculous as their plan is,” Begala said. “It’s shocking that that’s what they want to talk about when their own contributors are special interests who would benefit from the plan.”

In other Metro campaign activity Monday:

· U.S. Rep. Gene Green, D-Houston, endorsed Metro’s referendum at the Magnolia Transit Center. He touted the plan for improving air quality and reducing the noise level from buses.

· The Business Committee Against Rail held a news conference to raise questions about Metro’s light rail cost estimates, pointing out that planners are considering that an east/west line through downtown might be built in a subway — at least doubling the cost for that segment.

Metro Vice President John Sedlak responded that the east/west line has been designed at street level but could be buried if future engineering deems it affordable and desirable.

Chronicle reporter Salatheia Bryant contributed to this story.

Article II:
Eckels touts alternate commuter rail plan
Says system faster, cheaper than Metro’s
By LUCAS WALL Houston Chronicle Oct. 28, 2003

Harris County can build a commuter rail system faster and cheaper than Metro’s light rail plan, Judge Robert Eckels said Monday, releasing a draft of a study for the U.S. 290 and Texas 249 corridors.

Eckels and numerous other Republican leaders are urging voters to reject next week’s Metropolitan Transit Authority $7.5 billion expansion plan. It calls for building $5.8 billion of rail during the next 22 years: 65 miles of light rail as well as an eight-mile commuter line to Missouri City. Metro has no rail proposed to Hempstead or Tomball by 2025.

“There is a lot of potential for commuter rail in this community,” Eckels said at a news conference at Houston TranStar. “We believe it’s a viable alternative to light rail.”

Commissioner Steve Radack, who initiated the commuter rail review, is also against Metro’s plan. But he questioned the release of the study before its completion.

“Waiting until something is done accurately is very prudent,” said Radack, whose precinct includes most of the U.S. 290 corridor. “I’m optimistic. I think it has a tremendous amount of potential. But the study isn’t complete yet, and I’m not one of those people who likes to deal with fantasy or dreams.”

Radack said it’s unwise to present an unfinished study as an alternative to Metro’s transit-expansion referendum, which includes new bus routes, HOV lanes and local roadwork.

Commuter rail utilizes heavy trains, such as those run by Amtrak, and runs at high speeds on freight railroads with an exclusive right of way. Light rail utilizes smaller trains and runs at slower speeds, often on tracks embedded in the street.

The final commuter rail report, which Commissioners Court requested July 29, is due at the court’s next meeting Nov. 4 — the same day voters decide Metro’s transit-expansion plan.

Eckels said he expects the court will authorize a more detailed study looking at other potential commuter rail corridors and moving ahead with plans on who would pay for and operate the first two proposed lines.

“There are 165 miles or more of commuter line candidates in Harris County,” Eckels said while standing behind a model of an East Coast commuter train. One coach was modified with a sticker reading, “Harris County Express.”

A countywide commuter rail network at $5 million per mile could cost less than $1 billion, Eckels said, far cheaper than the $80-million-per-mile light rail system Metro proposes. (Metro’s cost-per-mile figure has been adjusted upward for inflation; the Main Street line under construction costs $43 million per mile).

Metro supporters, however, questioned Eckels’ numbers and dismissed the notion that commuter rail alone is a solution to the region’s traffic problems. They point out a more detailed study of a commuter train to Fort Bend County puts the cost at $14 million to $19 million per mile.

Paul Mabry, spokesman for Citizens for Public Transportation, called Eckels’ pre-election maneuver “an 11th-hour Hail Mary.” CPT is the political action committee campaigning for passage of the “Metro Solutions” plan.

“We want a complete system that does something about the traffic mess we’re into,” Mabry said. “You start by addressing where the traffic is the greatest: down in the urban area. It is not up in Prairie View.”

Metro officials, while supporting the commuter rail concept, pointed out some flaws in the county’s study, including basing construction costs on having only three stations per line, each with 150 parking spaces.

John Sedlak, a Metro vice president, said the transit authority’s Park & Ride lots along U.S. 290 accommodate about 5,000 commuter-bus riders daily. Sedlak noted the county study lacks ridership and fare revenue forecasts.

“We would certainly see commuter rail as being complementary to the Metro Solutions plan but not as an alternative to it,” Sedlak said. “The light rail is very specifically addressing the needs in congested corridors where there are high densities of transit ridership.”

Eckels has urged voters to turn down Metro Solutions and let the county come back next year with a better rail proposal. He said commuter rail could be operating by 2006, much more quickly than Metro’s light rail expansion, the first piece of which wouldn’t start running until 2008.

Most important, Eckels said, is that the larger trains are a better solution to traffic woes.

“Commuter rail is safer and faster, typically, than light rail because it runs in the existing rail corridors separated from traffic so you’re not mixing with the cars on the road,” Eckels said. “It runs where congestion is worse and can provide alternates for relief on congested freeways.”

Article II:
County touts commuter rail as cheaper
By LUCAS WALL Houston Chronicle Oct. 27, 2003

Harris County can build a commuter rail system faster and cheaper than Metro’s light rail plan, Judge Robert Eckels told reporters this morning.

Eckels released a draft of a commuter rail study Commissioners Court authorized July 29. It includes a 44-mile line between downtown Houston and Hempstead, built for $110 million, and a 39-mile line from downtown to Tomball for $94 million. The county estimates annual operating and maintenance will be $4.5 million for the U.S. 290 line to Hempstead and $3.8 million for the Texas 249 line to Tomball. Some of those costs would be recouped by passenger fares.

Numerous Republican leaders including Eckels are urging voters to reject next week’s Metropolitan Transit Authority $7.5 billion expansion plan. That proposal calls for building $5.8 billion of rail by 2025: 65 miles of light rail as well as an eight-mile commuter line to Missouri City. Metro has no rail proposed to Hempstead or Tomball.

“There is a lot of potential for commuter rail in this community,” Eckels said at a news conference at Houston TranStar. “We believe it’s a viable alternative to light rail.”

Commuter rail utilizes heavy trains, such as those run by Amtrak, and runs at high speeds on freight railroads with an exclusive right of way. Light rail utilizes smaller trains and runs at slower speeds, often on tracks embedded in the street.

The final report is due to Commissioners Court at its next meeting Nov. 4. That happens to be the day voters decide Metro’s transit-expansion plan.

Eckels said he expects the court will authorize a more detailed study looking at other potential commuter rail corridors and moving ahead with plans on who would pay for and operate the proposed lines along U.S. 290 and Texas 249.

“There are 165 miles or more of commuter line candidates in Harris County with the potential to serve virtually every part of this community,” Eckels said while standing behind a model of an East Coast commuter train. One coach was modified with a sticker reading, “Harris County Express.”

A countywide commuter rail network at $5 million per mile could cost less than $1 billion, Eckels said, far cheaper than the $80-million-per-mile light rail system Metro proposes.

Metro supporters, however, dismissed the notion that commuter rail alone is a solution to the region’s traffic problems and called Eckels’ plan “an 11th hour Hail Mary.” While they support the county’s commuter rail plans, Metro allies said it must be in addition to, not in lieu of, light rail.

“We want a complete system that does something about the traffic mess we’re into,” said Paul Mabry, spokesman for Citizens for Public Transportation, the political action committee campaigning for passage of the “Metro Solutions” plan. “You start by addressing where the traffic is the greatest: down in the urban area. It is not up in Prairie View.”

Shirley DeLibero, Metro president and CEO, expressed skepticism of the figures Eckels presented.

“I think his numbers are very preliminary,” DeLibero said after a morning news conference at the Magnolia Transit Center where U.S. Rep. Gene Green, D-Houston, endorsed the Metro Solutions referendum.

Metro officials were reviewing the county’s study before commenting further.

Eckels has urged voters to turn down Metro Solutions and let the county come back next year with a better rail proposal. He said commuter rail could be operating by 2006, much more quickly than Metro’s light rail expansion, the first piece of which wouldn’t start running until 2008.

Most important, Eckels said, is that the larger trains are a better solution to traffic woes.

“Commuter rail is safer and faster, typically, than light rail because it runs in the existing rail corridors separated from traffic so you’re not mixing with the cars on the road,” Eckels said. “It runs where congestion is worse and can provide alternates for relief on congested freeways.”

Eckels acknowledged some form of inner-city rail system is needed to distribute commuters once they arrive downtown on a heavy rail train. He encouraged Metro to come back next year with a smaller, less expensive rail proposal that would tie into the county’s planned commuter lines.

“I would hope after this election we can sit down and work with Metro on a better plan,” he said. “This makes a whole lot more sense.”

How the county would fund commuter trains is up in the air. Eckels said there are several possibilities including forming a county rail authority that would use toll road proceeds, having Metro run the trains if its light rail plan is defeated, or handing the task to the Texas Department of Transportation.

Commissioner Steve Radack, who originally proposed that Harris County study commuter rail, was unavailable for comment early this afternoon.

Mabry questioned the timing and sincerity of the county’s plan.

“Congestion in Houston is not a new problem yet we’ve only seen the county come forward in the last 60 days with a very preliminary study, which, by the judge’s own admission, will take a lot more study,” he said. “It’s pretty obvious this is only coming forward 10 days before an election to create confusion in the minds of voters.”

Mass-transit advocates, however, hailed the sure-to-be-controversial idea of diverting some Harris County Toll Road Authority money into commuter trains. To date, tolls have been used only to pay off tollway bonds and sell bonds for new highway projects.

“It’s great we are finally getting some toll road money into other options other than just trying to pave our way out of congestion,” Mabry said.

Commuter rail operates into 14 American cities: Baltimore; Boston; Chicago; Dallas; Los Angeles; Miami; Newark, N.J.; New Haven, Conn.; New York; Philadelphia; San Diego; San Jose, Calif.; Seattle; and Washington. Metro supporters note all of those cities except New Haven and Seattle also have light rail or a subway system and Seattle is building light rail now.

Chronicle reporter Salatheia Bryant contributed to this story.