[DeTomaso] FW: Car hits 220 MPH on new Texas Hwy

Sun Oct 28 22:45:32 EDT 2012

I'm not talking about just management contracts.  I'm talking about
everything - initial construction, paying for right of way, environmental
studies, maintenance, management, etc.

There are toll road authorities that do as much of this in the private
sector as possible.  Others, especially the larger authorities, insource
as much as possible.

Fort Bend County has 1 toll road employee (the director), but they have a
toll road.  Nearly everything was done by HCTRA - construction, etc.  Ft.
Bend has a revenue sharing plan with HCTRA.  That sounds like the Ft. Bend
director didn't do anything.  That's not what I mean.  The Ft. Bend
director worked his butt off making the toll road happen.  My point is Ft.
Bend didn't build the toll road, and they don't operate it.  It was all
done by the private sector through HCTRA.

Here's a site that discusses public vs. private:
http://cdn.publicinterestnetwork.org/assets/H5Ql0NcoPVeVJwymwlURRw/Private-
Roads-Public-Costs.pdf
I didn't read the whole .pdf, but here's a quote from page 1.  It
highlights what I was trying to convey:

     Though these privatization deals seem to offer state officials a
³quick fix,² they often pose
     long-term threats to the public interest. By privatizing roadways,
officials hand over
     significant control over regional transportation policy to
individuals who are accountable
     to their shareholders rather than the public.

The presentation is preaching against privatization, so you may want to
read it with a grain of salt.  It provides a lot of good information,
though.

HCTRA raised tolls because the previous time they raised tolls, the public
didn't complain loudly enough.  That's verbatim from one of the directors,
and I'm not making that up.

On 10/28/12 4:43 PM, "Gray Gregory" <rgg at gregorycook.com> wrote:

>Will,
>
>It sounds like you're confusing management contracts to operate existing
>toll roads that were built by various govt. entities and private built
>toll roads like SH-130 and the TTC. There's a big difference! The former
>are roads built by various toll road authorities funded by tax payers and
>bond issues. The TTC and SH-130 are completely funded by private
>companies; the state spent not one penny on the construction and owes not
>one penny of bond debt on this road. That is a pretty innovative (or at
>least not common) approach to funding road construction.
>
>If HCTRA is bringing in more money than they can spend on road
>maintenance and bond payments then why in the hell did they just raise
>tolls? I doubt private companies like Cintra will any more likely to
>raise tolls that gov't entities like HCTRA.
>
>Gray
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Will Kooiman [mailto:will.kooiman at gmail.com]
>Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2012 3:25 PM
>To: Gray Gregory; scott black; Jim Gray; michael frazier; pantera list
>Subject: Re: [DeTomaso] FW: Car hits 220 MPH on new Texas Hwy
>
>It isn't really innovation.  It has been done other places, just not on
>this large of a scale.
>
>Most toll roads are already built and managed by private industry.  The
>only difference with SH130 and the corridor is Cintra would have too much
>power (in my opinion) to set toll rates.
>
>This is big money.  HCTRA collects more than $1M every day in tolls.
>Their annual revenue is $400M to $500M.  Their biggest problem is
>spending all of it.  The current legislation will not allow them, for
>example, to build a rail system or to repair the ship channel.  The money
>must go to the toll road or to repay bonds.  Would't it be nice if they
>could use toll road funds to repair I-10/I-410?
>
>There is definitely waste at HCTRA, but there's waste everywhere.  When I
>was onsite, they did a pretty damn good job of keeping expenses low and
>quality high.  I don't know what it's like these days, but I seriously
>doubt that a private company could do better.
>
>
>
>On 10/28/12 2:26 PM, "Gray Gregory" <rgg at gregorycook.com> wrote:
>
>>I have a different take. I think private toll roads are a pretty
>>innovative idea to meet infrastructure needs especially given the
>>bankrupt nature of most all levels of govt. these days. In the case of
>>the Trans Texas Corridor it was way more than turning an existing road
>>into a toll road by adding toll booths. The plan was to build a new
>>high speed limited access 6 lane wide road on the existing 59 right of
>>way.
>>The only resemblance it would have to the existing hwy. was the route.
>>So the way I see it the state wasn't selling Cintra anything; they were
>>allowing them to build a new road and letting them collect tolls in
>>order to recoup their investment and earn a profit. The new toll road
>>is the same deal; it's a new road connecting San Antonio and Austin
>>which should substantially reduce traffic on I-35 which as I understand
>>can become quite a parking lot these days given the growth both cities
>>have experienced lately. Time will tell how well the deal works but I
>>bet the Cintra Zachry JV will do a better job managing the road than any
>>govt.
>>toll road authority.
>>
>>Gray
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: detomaso-bounces at realbig.com
>>[mailto:detomaso-bounces at realbig.com]
>>On Behalf Of Will Kooiman
>>Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2012 1:48 PM
>>To: scott black; Jim Gray; michael frazier; pantera list
>>Subject: Re: [DeTomaso] FW: Car hits 220 MPH on new Texas Hwy
>>
>>I mentioned this thread to my wife and she said, "Isn't that the toll
>>road that Perry sold to Spain?"
>>
>>Rick Perry pushed very hard for the Trans Texas Corridor.  The idea was
>>to build a road from Mexico to Texarkana to handle the increased
>>Mexican truck traffic from the Free Trade Agreement.
>>
>>You could argue whether the free trade agreement was a good idea or
>>not, and I certainly have an opinion on that subject, but what most
>>people don't know is the Trans Texas Corridor was an attempt to SELL
>>the road to a Spanish company.  Technically it wasn't selling the road.
>>Technically it was a 100 year lease.  But if the road "belongs" to the
>>company long after anyone alive today has died, then it has effectively
>>been sold.
>>
>>Part of the "new" corridor was along the route of existing highways (US
>>59), so those roads would not be rebuilt.  They would be converted to
>>toll roads.
>>
>>The agreement included a no-compete clause.  Texas was giving up the
>>right to build competing roads within 5 miles on either side of the new
>>toll road.
>>
>>If the purpose of the road was really to relieve existing roads from
>>this increased traffic, then there wouldn't be a no-compete, and they
>>wouldn't convert existing roads to toll roads.  You can't relieve roads
>>from traffic if the only thing you build is toll booths.  "Relieving
>>roads from congestion" is political spin doctoring.
>>
>>The Spanish company was Cintra. There were limits to how fast tolls
>>could be raised, but having seen how the process works, I guarantee you
>>tolls would follow supply and demand.  When it is a profit center, you
>>try to maximize your profits.  It's that simple.
>>
>>I heard estimates that Cintra was going to pay 1 trillion dollars for
>>the right to collect tolls, and they wouldn't break even for 50 years.
>>But the second 50 years, they would make a killing.  Of course, they
>>didn't have to wait 50 years to make money.  Once the deal is signed,
>>it is worth the 100 year value.
>>
>>At any rate, this new toll road is a similar deal.  It is a consortium
>>65% controlled by Cintra and 35% by Zachry Construction.  The lease is
>>only 50 years this time, but that's still a long time.  Cintra said in
>>2006 that the toll rate would be 0.125 USD/mile.  It is already up to
>>0.15 USD/mile for pay-by-TxTag and 0.20 USD/mile for pay-by-mail.
>>
>>My point is it is a very bad idea to turn infrastructure into a profit
>>center, especially when the profits leave the area.
>>
>>Red light cameras are also profit centers.  Most are managed by
>>American Traffic Solutions (ATS) out of Phoenix.  I know ATS because
>>they started in the tolling industry.  I have worked closely with them.
>>They have good solutions, but I know for a fact they are making a
>>killing on these systems.
>>It is in the billions.  That is billions of dollars leaving the local
>>economies and going into ATS's pockets.  You could argue that they make
>>the intersections safer, but I bet if you ran a before/after study of
>>accidents, there is no measurable difference.
>>
>>Sorry for the rant.  It just bothers me seeing politicians sell stuff
>>that isn't theirs.
>>
>>
>>From:  scott black <timepiecepr2 at yahoo.com>
>>Reply-To:  scott black <timepiecepr2 at yahoo.com>
>>Date:  Friday, October 26, 2012 8:48 AM
>>To:  Will Kooiman <will.kooiman at gmail.com>, Jim Gray <grayjim at att.net>,
>>Michael Frazier <red3644 at hotmail.com>, Pantera List
>><detomaso at realbig.com>
>>Subject:  Re: [DeTomaso] FW: Car hits 220 MPH on new Texas Hwy
>>
>>And the publicity stunt worked....
>>
>>Scott Black
>>TimePiece Public Relations & Marketing
>>Marketing Acceleration
>>www.tprm-usa.com
>>  
>> 
>> 
>>  
>>
>>  From: Will Kooiman <will.kooiman at gmail.com>
>> To: Jim Gray <grayjim at att.net>; michael frazier <red3644 at hotmail.com>;
>>pantera list <detomaso at realbig.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 4:05 PM
>> Subject: Re: [DeTomaso] FW: Car hits 220 MPH on new Texas Hwy
>>  
>> 
>>Another publicity stunt.  You can't outrun the speed of light.
>>
>>Most lanes have 2 commands - "trigger" and "save".  The loops in the
>>road tell the equipment how fast the vehicle is traveling, and then it
>>is simple math to determine which frame to "trigger".  Later on, the
>>equipment decides if the vehicle has a valid transponder.  If the
>>vehicle is a "violator", the lane equipment tells the camera to "save"
>>the image for processing.
>>
>>As long as the equipment is working properly, it will catch vehicles
>>over
>>1,000 mph.  At that speed, you're flying low, but the loops will
>>probably still read.  It is based on having a large metallic mass near
>>the loops.
>>The wheels don't have to be touching the road.
>>
>>Or, they might be using laser triggers, but most authorities use loops
>>cut in the pavement.  They are cheaper and more reliable.
>>
>>The equipment that reads the transponders was initially rated at
>>something like 35mph.  When the business started moving towards high
>>speed lanes (no gates), everyone had to deal with the speed of the
>>readers.  They get around the limitation by oversampling.  The
>>equipment assigns tolls to vehicles based on the handshake count.  If
>>the loops say that a vehicle is in lane 1 and the handshake count for
>>lane 1 is highest for tag#1, that's who gets the toll - even if the
>>vehicle is really in lane 5, unless the reader in lane 5 has a higher
>>handshake count for tag#1, and then it <should> only be assigned to
>>lane 5, but sometimes it gets assigned twice.
>> We solved this by using one controller for lanes 1-5.  Many roads have
>>a different controller for each lane.  Duplicates are thrown out in the
>>back office, including duplicates where it charged the picture and the
>>transponder.  That's why it is important to keep your license plate up
>>to date in your account.
>>
>>Sorry for rambling.  I'm making up for the quietness on the list.
>>
>>My point is they knew well before the test that the toll equipment
>>would "catch" the Cadillac.  They are trying to promote the toll road,
>>plus they are emphasizing that you can't get away without paying, even
>>if you go over 200mph.
>>
>>
>>On 10/25/12 3:36 PM, "Jim Gray" <grayjim at att.net> wrote:
>>
>>>It just proves my Pantera needs more gears!  Oh, and triple the
>>>horsepower.
>>>
>>>Jim Gray
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>----- Original Message ----
>>>From: michael frazier <red3644 at hotmail.com>
>>>To: pantera list <detomaso at realbig.com>
>>>Sent: Thu, October 25, 2012 2:50:11 PM
>>>Subject: [DeTomaso] FW: Car hits 220 MPH on new Texas Hwy
>>>
>>>
>>>FWIW...
>>>Michael
>>>Gruppo Rompiculi Corsa
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2012/10/25/car-hits-220-mph-on-new-texa
>>>s
>>>-hi
>>>ghway/?intcmp=features
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>                
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>
>>>Detomaso Forum Managed by POCA
>>>
>>>Archive Search Engine Now Available at
>>>http://www.realbig.com/detomaso/
>>>
>>>DeTomaso mailing list
>>>DeTomaso at realbig.com
>>>http://realbig.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/detomaso
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>
>>>Detomaso Forum Managed by POCA
>>>
>>>Archive Search Engine Now Available at
>>>http://www.realbig.com/detomaso/
>>>
>>>DeTomaso mailing list
>>>DeTomaso at realbig.com
>>>http://realbig.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/detomaso
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>
>>Detomaso Forum Managed by POCA
>>
>>Archive Search Engine Now Available at http://www.realbig.com/detomaso/
>>
>>DeTomaso mailing list
>>DeTomaso at realbig.com
>>http://realbig.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/detomaso
>>
>>
>> 
>> 
>>  
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>
>>Detomaso Forum Managed by POCA
>>
>>Archive Search Engine Now Available at http://www.realbig.com/detomaso/
>>
>>DeTomaso mailing list
>>DeTomaso at realbig.com
>>http://realbig.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/detomaso
>>
>>
>
>
>
>