Metrorail Expansion Hits Snag

[GovernorAggie]

Midtown TIRZ was around before the rail was even voted on.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's what I figured--and that's different from my point. The should be proposals for TIRZ that would work as "Special Station Areas" or something. Call it what you want, the "Blue Line TIRZ" or whatever.

[Lowbrow]

Link to TIRZ 2005 Budget

[VelvetJ]

Obviously you don't remember all the Shirly DeLibero fiascos.  She even lied about what college degrees she had. 

And since I pay Metro tax, I expect a little more than never ending construction projects.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

MidtownCoog, it really sounds like it is time you let that go. What amazes me is how often both Delibero and Brown are still brought up on this board. Those people are gone. It really is time to move on.

With all of their critics, at the end of the day they accomplished something no one else has.......they brought rail to Houston. We wouldn't even be posting on this particular thread if it were not for them.

KinKaidAlum, I'm with you. Something is rotten in the state of Denmark and it's not their cheese. There are unseen hands in this and history points to two powerful men.

[MidtownCoog]

Ah, but if it were only so simple to pretend Brown never existed.

You black helicopter guys need to get over it. METRO is a cumbersome bureaucracy.

[jt16]

How can we just drop Brown and Delibero? We still suffer the consequences of their complete ineptness. We have a rail system that is more flawed than it is good. And if you don't think that's a major concern for appropriations committees in D.C., you're kidding yourself.

[MidtownCoog]

Not to mention the pension fiasco and emergency workers without contracts.

Brown was bad. Shirley was a liar, and we are still paying the price.

And from what I can tell, the "new" METRO is no better.

We need to demand accounability.

[GovernorAggie]

Speaking of acountability and METRO's reputation--

I remember when the new CEO met with DeLay and Culberson at an Irving meeting and there was love all around and they were fast friends, blah, blah, blah. Wilson seemed to have at least nudged them onto METRO's side of the fence, albeit they probably would have supported things reluctantly. But I'll take reluctant support over no support. And I'll take no support over a roadblock (or "rail"block).

However, this application fiasco seemed to "prove" DeLay and Culberson right in their own opinions, and may have ruined a chance to build up METRO's reputation with those two.

As much as DeLay and Culberson have opposed rail, I had hoped that after the Irving meeting with Wilson that steps could be taken to improve their views of rail in Houston. Those who thought that they would radically change from not just being against rail but writing legislation against it to full support are delusional. These are two old men who have the "old trusty" mentality and have to be convinced.

Just like people were skeptical when DeLay made some statements months ago that, on the surface, seemed supportive of rail, DeLay and Culberson have been just as skeptical about METRO being able to put together an efficient rail system.

Imagine the HUGE amount of effort and change that DeLay and Culberson would have to display in order to convince people that they finally support rail transit in Houston. People would expect them to do things in "their" way to be convinced. Same thing goes for METRO winning those two over--and right now they missed a decent opportunity.

On a related note, something tells me that if the County ever got serious about its commuter rail proposals, it would have absolutely NO problem getting active help from DeLay and Culberson for not just one, but ALL the lines. Eckels, DeLay, and Culberson seem to be on the same page, whether you agree with them or not.

[KinkaidAlum]

Sure Culberson and DeLay were being buddy buddy with METRO... that was BEFORE the November elections and rail had already proven to be fairly popular with voters! The dudes wanted to get re-elected because they have gotten rich off of their shady dealings.

With the past history of these two men, I find it hard to believe that there are people out there that would believe anything they say or do.

[GovernorAggie]

With the past history of these two men, I find it hard to believe that there are people out there that would believe anything they say or do.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You made my point for me. I honestly think that it would take the world, the moon, Halley's Comet, and Alpha Centauri in order for DeLay and Culberson to get people to believe that they really do support rail, if and when they do--and I think they will someday later rather than sooner.

Now just imagine them having the same attitude towards METRO and imagine the mountains that METRO has to climb to be favored by those two.

Look at it this way--who in here would have thought even 5 years ago that Bob Lanier, given his history, would every be AGAINST a freeway (Grand Parkway, which he was actually for once), and have a favorable tone about rail and downtown interests? If you say you do I would advise all those around you to leave b/c you have a lightning bolt with your name on it.

[KinkaidAlum]

Well, Sunday's Chronicle has a more accurate story on what happened in DC.

Surprise, Surpirse.

[ssullivan]

Okay now I am really pissed. This whole thing just smacks of Culberson and DeLay's involvement even more after reading the latest article about it. It is totally wrong that cities less than half the size of Houston are being appropriated transit funding and we're getting nothing. And for Culberson to sit there and say that Houston shouldn't get preferential treatment when other cities, like San Francisco are doing the same thing we tried to do and getting a green light, is just further proof that he will do anything he can to keep us from getting that money. The man obviously does not care about improving the quality of life in this city. Unfortunately I've lived in his district most of the time I've been in Houston (for a year I was in DeLay's) and I've always voted against the two of them. I just don't understand why people keep re-electing these yahoos when it should be obvious to anyone with half a brain that they do this area more harm than good. I'm so sick of people who are unethical, self-centered, and narrow minded being elected year after year just because they stand up and proclaim they believe in "family values" and that they are "good Christians" even though their actions in office demonstrate time and time again that they are total losers. I just don't understand it.

[VelvetJ]

THANK YOU Kinkaidalum, just as I suspected. I just read it. Sometimes all it takes is a little common sense even if one doesn't have all of the facts just yet. I knew there was another side to this. Shame on them both and those who foolhardily try to defend them.

METRO may be at fault here, but there are others that are just as much to blame for Houston not getting Federal money.

[VelvetJ]

I've said before and I say again, Delay and Culberson are in the pockets of the oil companies. The last thing they want is a train zooming past those oil headquarters on the Katy Freeway in the oil capital of the world.

Houston will ultimately pay for the actions of these two, and I only hope they live to see it.

[VelvetJ]

I just don't understand why people keep re-electing these yahoos when it should be obvious to anyone with half a brain that they do this area more harm than good. I'm so sick of people who are unethical, self-centered, and narrow minded being elected year after year just because they stand up and proclaim they believe in "family values" and that they are "good Christians" even though their actions in office demonstrate time and time again that they are total losers. I just don't understand it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Totally agree. As a Christian myself, it sickens me to see people use Christianity as a cloak to do dirty deeds. Unfortunately in this day and time all a person has to say is they "care about family", oppose abortion, and oppose gay marriage, and those words seem to TOTALLY BLIND people to the obvious facts, despite the smoking guns they leave out in the open for everyone to see. It's possible to be Christian and incompetent. It's possible to be Christian and corrupt. It's possible to be Christian and skate the line only inches from breaking the law. It's possible for Christians to not directly lie to the citizens but just not tell them the truth.

One thing about Christianity is most of us should know the law of reaping and sowing, and Delay and Culberson know they don't do a lot of things for honest reasons, and should really be afraid for the return on some of their unfair actions. Their boldness in some of their actions as Christians truly surprises me.

[713 To 214]

EFFORT IN BILL TO HELP RAIL DELETED

Proponents question whether 2 congressmen still oppose plan

By LUCAS WALL

Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle

Language that would have sped up Metro's light rail expansion got stripped out of a massive appropriations bill in the last Congress, prompting a debate about whether two Houston congressmen are still blocking the city's rail plan.

The deletion came to light last week after the Federal Transit Administration left Metro's Northline and Southeast rail extensions out of its annual funding recommendation report to Congress.

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, offered a rider to the Senate version of the appropriations bill that would have forced the FTA to accept the Metropolitan Transit Authority's nontraditional financing proposal. House staff members said they inadvertently inserted similar language in the House version, but it was deleted during frenzied conference-committee negotiations days before Thanksgiving. A similar rider for a San Francisco light rail project was not deleted and is now law.

The deletion has infuriated rail proponents, especially in light of the success of San Francisco, represented by U.S. House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi. Metro and its supporters contend that completion of the next four light rail lines will be postponed.

"It's an affront to the citizens of Houston," said Ed Wulfe, chairman of the Main Street Coalition, who has promoted development along the 7 1/2-mile light rail line that opened last year. "Somebody is putting their personal agenda ahead of what the people want."

After voters approved a November 2003 transit referendum authorizing an 80-mile rail network, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Sugar Land, and Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston, said they would drop their objections to federal funding for MetroRail.

Hutchison's amendment would have authorized 100 percent federal funding for the Northline and Southeast extensions in exchange for Metro funding two later rail lines solely with local tax dollars. While DeLay and Culberson say they had nothing to do with the deletion of the amendment in the final version, they say they opposed Hutchison's rider, which by authorizing full federal funding, exempted Metro from federal law requiring at least a 20 percent local contribution on each rail segment. The typical local share is more like 50 percent.

"Culberson is the only Texas member of the transportation appropriations subcommittee," said Robin Holzer, chairwoman of the Citizens Transportation Coalition, a grass-roots organization that promotes more public transit in Houston. "The committee conferees would defer to the Texas delegation on this matter, especially the representative from Houston. "

Hutchison's proposal "would have changed the way we've funded rail projects," DeLay said Friday while attending a Fort Bend County Republican Party dinner. "Metro wanted 100 percent funding, and I don't agree with that. It's the wrong thing for Metro to see if they can get full funding from Congress. They should come up with some matching funds."

Culberson said Friday that Metro asked him in October to support the amendment. He sent letters to the chairmen of the House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee, Don Young, R-Alaska, and the House transportation appropriations subcommittee, Ernest Istook, R-Okla. Both responded they strongly objected to the exemption Metro sought.

Given those reservations, Culberson, the region's only member on the House Appropriations Committee, told Metro he could not endorse the amendment, which he also personally opposed.

"What Metro was asking for is illegal and utterly inappropriate because all 200 rail-transit projects across the country would then ask for the same 100 percent full funding deal," Culberson said. The conferees "should have struck it, you bet."

DeLay and Culberson both repeated their pledge last week not to block MetroRail funding once the FTA recommends it. Metro hopes to get its FTA rating no later than July so it will be eligible for money in the fiscal 2006 appropriations bill.

First line locally funded

Rail supporters note that Metro built the $324 million Main Street line with only local funds after DeLay put a rider in a 2001 appropriations bill banning the FTA from granting federal dollars to Metro for light rail. They also note that Metro would pay for all of the$160 million Harrisburg line and the $439 million Westpark line.

If the federal government paid for the $356 million Northline extension and the $424 million Southeast line, that would represent only 44 percent of the rail system's total $1.7 billion cost.

Metro proposed the unusual funding plan as a way to accelerate construction of the Harrisburg and Westpark lines. If no federal money is used on those projects, the authority could bypass the FTA's lengthy review process.

Frank Wilson, Metro president and CEO, said all four rail extensions could be under construction simultaneously if Congress agreed to the waiver -- opening a year or two ahead of the 2012 goal set in the referendum.

"I certainly want to help give the maximum flexibility to the transit authority," Hutchison said Friday in Houston.

House Republican aides said the deletion of Hutchison's amendment was not made by party leaders.

"The language was inadvertently included because of staff error and was removed," said John Scofield, House Appropriations Committee spokesman.

Chris Paulitz, Hutchison's spokesman, said the senator succeeded in getting another rider into the bill to help Metro. Congress approved language exempting Metro from the preliminary study required by the FTA for all future rail lines that were part of the 2003 referendum. That will help expedite the projects and save money, he said.

"The senator does not think you need to spend $10 million of hardworking Texans' taxpayer money just to reaffirm what they already said at the ballot box," Paulitz said. "We are willing to look at every avenue to make this a faster project and process."

Culberson said he supported that amendment.

Deal granted to other cities

Other lawmakers question why Culberson would vehemently oppose flexibility for financing, and why he'd vote for a bill giving such flexibility to San Francisco but not Houston.

"We have been providing these light rail funds to cities that are half our size," said Rep. Gene Green, D-Houston.

"It seems like we as a delegation ought to quit fighting old battles and get together."

Green said Metro is not asking for anything unprecedented. San Francisco for years has obtained a waiver for its Third Street light rail line, the first section of which is under construction solely with local funds.

The FTA will then pay for most of the second phase, which is being designed. Other cities have obtained similar financing deals from Congress.

"We are short-changing our own constituents," Green said. "We are picking cities around the country who we would rather appropriate transportation dollars to than our own neighborhoods."

Mayor Bill White said he spoke Friday with Culberson and Hutchison to stress the need for Congress to expedite MetroRail expansion.

"I do not know why any member from Texas would have opposed the original language proposed by Senator Hutchison," White said. "It's fair to require a substantial local match, but the form of the local match should be flexible and practical so to allow construction as soon as we can."

Culberson said he doesn't know why the San Francisco waiver went through while the Houston waiver got spiked.

"Just because San Francisco was able to sneak illegal and inappropriate legislative language into the final omnibus bill doesn't make it right for Houston," he said. "We shouldn't change the law to let one guy rob the bank."

Metro Chairman David Wolff said it's appropriate to ask Congress for financial flexibility, and he wishes Culberson and DeLay would have supported Hutchison's rider.

"This is the time for them to show the people of Houston they strongly support money coming to Houston rather than going to Dallas, New York or other cities," Wolff said. "That's what a congressman is supposed to do.

"It's very difficult to get federal money without the cooperation of Congressman DeLay and Congressman Culberson."

Chronicle reporters Gebe Martinez in Washington and Anne Marie Kilday and Rad Sallee in Houston contributed to this report.

traffic@chron.com

[713 To 214]

^ If the above article doesn't demonstrate that Delay and Culbersom are quietly thwarting Metro, and, YES the City of Houston's voting public, efforts to expand rail, then I gues nothing will convince you. . .except maybe a transcript and videotape from the secret closed door sessions these two (along with others) are having regarding how they will continue to place road blocks in the way of mass transit in Houston. . .and we know the transcript thing is not going to happen. . .sooo. I guess you'll never be convinced.

[Talbot]

Does Houston have the worst luck with people that represent this city or what?!

[GovernorAggie]

Yeah I saw that article this morning and felt pretty miffed. Nevertheless, I feel better that I gave them the benefit of the doubt--but now I see that they really aren't committed to getting stuff done in Houston.

That also makes me feel that Senator Hutchison should NOT run for governor. She should stay in DC to at least be Houston's proponent for alternative transportation.

But I must say that I see Culberson's point that if they allow Houston to get money up front for rail, then others would ask--after all, it already happened b/c Houston asked for what San Francisco already got. And since when did politicians have the attitutde that like Culberson's "Just because SF snuck it through doesn't mean Houston can..."? They always seem to be, "well this area got xyz, now where's mine?" And don't get me started with Don Young's denial of support, since he's getting his $2 BILLION, 2-lane bridge to NOWHERE (the Knik Arm Crossing in Anchorage).

And while I see the risk of the Feds giving so much money to the cities, we all know the power of the federal govenrment when you don't repay your bills or cheat them out of money. If METRO messed up, the Feds could make the agency disappear. However, I don't think that it would get that far b/c METRO would be good for it, otherwise they would not ask for the flexible deal.

I'm very unimpressed by both Mr. DeLay and Mr. Culberson. Very impressed by Senator Hutchison, but since the Governor of Texas is a weak office by the state's constitution, I would rather she stay in Washington--UNLESS she has a plan on changing the make-up of TxDOT to help with mass transit more.