(Note: The sunset bill was reported favorably from Pickett’s committee April 28 and will likely be on the House calendar in the next few days.)

HOGUE: What’s in the committee substitute that’s not in the original Transportation Sunset bill?

Pickett: I authored HB 2589, which was a reform bill to run up the flag to see what kind of support I would get. We rolled most of that bill into the Sunset. In the committee substitute there are provisions for creating funding formulas and subaccounts for metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) in Texas to really fulfill what TxDOT said they were going to do back in 2003 to empower the local communities, that didn’t really happen.

And in this bill, the (transportation project) priorities would be set by the local planning organizations. They would have the ability to know how much money they’re going to have … It takes some of the politics away from the [Texas Transportation] Commission. Everyone will know where they stand and where they don’t stand. … It requires cash flows to be estimated at the beginning of each session so we can lay out where we’re going to be.

It tracks letting of projects, construction, and the whole process. Right now, if you want to know about the money, you go one place. If you want to know what the project-letting schedule is, you go to another place. If you want to know what the different plans are, you go to another place. We’re trying to put it all in one concise location.

And, also, this gives direction to TxDOT. … We include an inspector general, and a legislative oversight committee, even though the oversight committee was in the Sunset committee recommendation already.

HOGUE: When you’re out "working the members" to gain support for the bill, what do you typically tell them?

Pickett: On the core of this is developing funding formulas so different regions could plan. … There was an exercise done about six years ago in just one category … and the eight metropolitan areas came together as a working group in 2003. It’s worked very well. All the communities used to go before TxDOT and beg for funds, or compete against each other, and depending on their political clout or will, that’s how it went. And again, in this Sunset bill, your local communities could literally decide your priorities. Rather than TxDOT telling you what to do, it would be you telling TxDOT what to do. They should become more of a managing partner instead of a big stick.

HOGUE: Do you think dividing the department into several other departments, such as a department of motor vehicles, is the best way to proceed?

Pickett: I don’t think that hurts … It might make motor vehicle title registration more efficient, but it was never a real priority, as it didn’t drain from road and bridges maintenance. That was one of our recommendations, and I’m fine with that and I support that. But it’s not going to make any difference in building any more road and bridges. But it does make that aspect of what they do more efficient. So that’s good— but it still isn’t a big deal for road and bridge [construction].

HOGUE: Do you have any concerns about what the House members may do after this comes up on the floor?

Pickett: No, there’s not a concern … You can look at the appropriations amendments regarding transportation — They’re against tolls, [and other] certain things, I’m sure there are going to be lots and lots of things the members are going to have to vet, and get their vote on the record back home whether for or against. But I think that’s the membership’s right. A lot of those things, if we word them correctly, can be included at the end of the day. There will be a lot of amendments that get on that may need some help later on. And I’m hoping for a little bit of sense and sensibility — you can’t completely go backwards. … I think the members deserve the right to recommend and suggest anything they want to.

HOGUE: Are there any amendments you can tell us about that may emerge from the House floor?

Pickett: Oh, I’m sure — do away with the Trans Texas Corridor, stop all tolls, amendments regarding lobbying, promotion/advertising … And some of those I support. Again, if crafted correctly. I’m not opposed to TxDOT doing some promotion that’s informational. I’m not happy about the way TxDOT went about selling methods of finance. I don’t think that’s their job, and I don’t think they have any business doing that. They should stick to information. I see those kinds of amendments coming. I see amendments coming trying to do away with comprehensive development agreements (CDAs), private folks, and people who still have a problem with someone who is outside of Texas and the United States investing in our roads. I don’t have the same fear as other people do. I mean, it’s a financing deal. … We’ll see license plate bills, the naming of highways and roads, asking for driveways to be built, you name it, I’m expecting everything, including the kitchen sink.

HOGUE: Do you have any thoughts on why TxDOT’s PR budget was slashed?

Pickett: Sure. Because of the reasons I stated earlier about selling proposals and policies not offering just general information to the public. That’s my feeling on it. We spend millions of dollars on cute commercials, and telling a story was not necessarily informational. When you sell a product, you’re going to put your twist on it — it slices, it dices, it shreds, it marinates. I did not like that when TxDOT was going out and trying to do cutesy, animated commercials. And I’m sure that was other peoples’ thoughts.

HOGUE: Would you prefer that RMAs and MPOs be utilized more in the future, or would you prefer they be done away with?

Pickett: If I had my way, I’d do away with RMAs and just let local communities handle it. And it may be difficult now with all the bonds that are outstanding that RMAs have issued — including my own. And there may be some tweaks in the operations of RMAs. But there was such a rush to create them by TxDOT, it just bothered me how it was rolled out, like toll roads in general. … It was easy to dangle money in front of somebody and create a toll because you get to keep all the money for your area, and at the same time tell people that if you don’t build a toll road, we’re not going to build any at all. And that’s what we’ve been working under for the past six years.

… I’m not a big fan of regional mobility authorities … but what I told my people is, if they would learn to get involved and empower their MPOs, you can use that power for good instead of evil, and that’s what we did in El Paso. I was not supportive of letting them create an RMA, because they still have to go through those MPOs. But we’ve been able to empower them.

HOGUE: What does the future look like for CDAs?

Pickett: With the way I’d like to see things — meaning the local communities make the decisions — I’m not afraid of CDAs. I don’t like TxDOT telling me what I have to do. I don’t mind CDAs and private partnerships going and visiting with the 25 planning organizations around the state rather than going to one [TxDOT] and trying to force it down. I think [CDAs] should be decisions that each community has the right to make. If it works in South Texas or El Paso or Dallas, and the local community wants it, then I’m OK with them. I just don’t want it to be something that’s forced on them by a state agency in Austin.

Comments (0)

Comment	smaller | bigger
Name
Write the displayed characters
Subscribe via email (Registered users only) I have read and agree to the Terms of Usage.
	Add Comment