The Collin County Observer

Commissioners engage in heated debate
by Heather M. Smith, Staff writer / Plano Star Courier

Two county engineering projects garnered a sizzling debate among County Commissioners during Monday’s court meeting.

The first project is an engineering services agreement with Lockwood, Andrews and Newnam, Inc. for the improvements to SH 289 from Parvin Branch south of U.S. 380 to north of U.S. 380. The budget amendment will total $1,031,884.

Commissioner Matt Shaheen suggested going back to Lockwood, Andrew and Newnam, Inc. and renegotiate for a new, lower bid. He said if the county can’t get a lower bid, they should go to a different company. Shaheen said he didn’t want to change the scope of the project; he just wants to negotiate the company’s hourly rate. However, Commissioner Joe Jaynes argued that now is the time to move on the project.

“I don’t want to see this important project have to wait,” Jaynes said.

Jaynes said he believes the area around State Highway 289 and U.S. 380 will be a huge development area and urged his fellow commissioners to press on with the project.

The court approved the item in a 4-1 vote, with Shaheen voting against. While Judge Keith Self voted with the majority of the court, he cautioned them against making hasty decisions on budget issues, likening their decisions to the “rush” decision regarding the stimulus package passed by Congress.

The second project is an engineering services agreement with HNTB Corporation for the Lake Lavon bridge study. The budget amendment will total $381,875 and cost 3,100 man hours. HNTB will charge $256 per hour for a principal worker, while a different company, Dannenbaum, would charge $169 per hour for the same level worker.

“We are paying a premium,” Shaheen said. “There’s no doubt that any one of the companies can do the project.”

Tensions were high while commissioners debated their points regarding the project. Again, Shaheen suggested going back to HNTB to renegotiate their rates. Self said that if ever there was a project where the county could make its point n that they want engineering companies to bring competitive bids n this is the project. Commissioner Kathy Ward agreed and said she would like to go back to HNTB and ask them to change their hourly rate. HNTB had already lowered their bid by 7 percent.

“Just because we have half a million dollars doesn’t mean we have to spend $500,000,” Self said.

This would be the third time the Lake Lavon bridge study would be pushed back, but Shaheen said it would not be a slow process to get more bids. He said he’s willing to delay the project a couple of weeks if it will save taxpayers money.

“We just need to get this project moving; my patience is growing thin on these delays,” Commissioner Jerry Hoagland said. “This project won’t only be delayed a couple of weeks, it will be longer.”

After much debate, Shaheen motioned to go back to HNTB and ask for an additional 13 percent reduction and Ward seconded the motion. Everyone except Hoagland and Jaynes voted for the motion.

read more....

COURT FILING suggests, CoServ ZAPPED $54 million intended for members

February 25, 2009 -
Collin County Business Press

There is blood in the CoServ boardroom, according to Denton County court filings. Plaintiffs claim, in a class action lawsuit filed against Corinth-based CoServ Electric, that the co-op converted $54 million of class member money into equity owned by the co-op that was intended for distribution to its members.

CoServ services the fast-growing communities of McKinney and Frisco and large parts of Denton County.

The Collin County Business Press has obtained an Amended Counter Claim and Original Petition of Intervention in which Janice Brady, Duncan Duval and Paul Confer filed against CoServ Electric seeking $54 million for alleged conversion of member money.

Austin Attorney, Paul Lawrence of The Lawrence Firm, filed the petition on behalf of the plaintiffs in the Denton Judiciary District 211, on documents Wednesday Feb. 18, 2009 on behalf of the plaintiffs.

The filing alleges that CoServ has committed serious, unlawful breaches of it relationship of trust with plaintiffs and of the members and former members of the electric co-op. The information is based on tax filings and public documents provided to the plaintiffs by Mark Glover, a CoServ director.

“We have the highest level of confidence that CoServ will defeat all of the counterclaims,” said Mike Dreyspring, CEO, CoServ

Between 2003 and 2008, the plaintiffs claim CoServ converted $54 million of class member’s money in to equity owned by CoServ. The property is referred to as patronage capital or capital credits. The defendant allegedly retired $75 million in patronage capital to its member and former members.

“Our attorneys are looking over the suits and looking into the details of the filing,” said Shane Laws, spokesperson for CoServ. No other comments were made.

The process is known as retirement of the class member’s patronage capital. The claim by the plaintiffs against CoServ states that only $21 million of $75 million was distributed to members and former members. The conversion of funds is classified as “discounting” of class members’ capital credits.

“Without the practice of capital credit discounting, that 77 percent would have received no capital credit retirement payments from the $21 million paid in the last six years," Dreysping said. “All of those dollars would have gone to only 23 percent of the members, and that is contrary to the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA) strong recommendation for cooperatives to maximize the percentage of current membership receiving capital credit retirements. For CoServ, capital credit discounting is an effective way of achieving that goal. Our capital credit retirement process is consistent with sound industry practice and supported by numerous Internal Revenue Service rulings.”

On November 30, 2001, certain subsidiaries of CoServ filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization. On February 1, 2002, CoServ entered into the same fate.

The petition filed by the plaintiffs alleges that during the bankruptcy, CoServ primary creditor, the National Rural Utilities Cooperative Finance Corporation (CFC), stated repeatedly that the co-op’s management acted in bad faith, failing to fulfill its fiduciary duties, and unwilling to put creditors interest ahead of management interest.

CFC’s concerns prompted reorganization, requiring CoServ to replace William McGinnis, CEO and president, and Kevin Haney, general council. McGinnis resigned, but was awarded a severance package and moved to a position as CoServ insurance agent, according to the filing. CoServ 2002 balance sheet shows that the defendant accrued a liability of about $3.7 million for “Accrued Severance Obligations,” the petition filed by the plaintiffs stated.

Haney resigned and was awarded a severance package and then affiliated himself with an outside law firm that was already doing business with CoServ under his supervision, the plaintiffs allege in the lawsuit. He continued as CoServ’s outside general council under contract at a compensation of approximately $414,000 per year, plus employee benefits, the petition alleges.

$50,000 investigation against Brady prompts filings

In 2008, Glover assisted Brady in an unsuccessful attempt to replace Jerry Cobb, chairman of the board, in hopes of assisting in shifting control of the board from “old guard” to a newer, more reformed minded majority.

Glover is one of seven board members.

“,CoServ has wrongfully undertaken an investigation of Janice Brady's campaign, exaggerated the issues, wasted member money and filed frivolous litigation in an attempt to punish Janice Brady and remove me as a director,” wrote Glover in a letter to CoServ's board of Directors.

Glover admits to providing Brady with a list of co-op members who voted in previous board elections. The list was also provided to incumbent board members for their use in the election process.

According to the petition filed by the plaintiffs, upon learning that Brady had a list of members who vote and that she knew about the board’s access to daily vote tallies, the defendant embarked upon an $50,000 investigation to establish that Glover supplied Brady the voter list so that it might call for Glover’s resignation on the premise that he violated board policy by providing “confidential” information to one of the cooperative’s member-owners.

On November 20, 2008, reading a script prepared by the corporate general counsel, the board chairman called for and obtained a board resolution requesting Glover’s resignation and censoring him by denying him access to information required for the performance of his duties as a director, the plaintiffs allege.

On December 20, 2008, the general council sent Glover a certified letter requesting that he announce before January 20, 2009, whether he would resign from the board.

read more (subscription may be req'd.)....

"It should be obvious with the constant news of increased violence in Mexico that Texas needs law enforcement to focus on real criminal threats instead of targeting religious minorities and groups with unpopular political opinions."

"The North Central Texas Fusion Center should be reviewed to determine whether it can contribute to the serious public safety mission of Texas or not."
Rebecca Bernhardt, ACLU TX Policy Director

After the Collin County Observer published "Fusion: Fear, Fiction, Fact and Freedom" yesterday, the national office of the ACLU in Washington DC issued a press release calling the "Prevention Awareness Bulletin" written and distributed by the North Central Texas Fusion Center, "the latest example of inappropriate police intelligence operations targeting political, religious and social activists for investigation.""
Bill

“The Texas fusion center’s bulletin shows an unhealthy disregard for constitutional rights and democratic processes”.

“It demonstrates the lack of professionalism that exists at fusion centers and the severe lack of oversight at the state, local and federal levels."
Michael German, ACLU National Security Policy Counsel and former FBI Agent

==================================
Fusion Center Encourages Improper Investigations Of Lobbying Groups And Anti-War Activists (2/25/2009)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: Mandy Simon media@dcaclu.org

WASHINGTON – A Texas fusion center’s “Prevention Awareness Bulletin” made public last night is the latest example of inappropriate police intelligence operations targeting political, religious and social activists for investigation. The North Central Texas Fusion System bulletin states that it is “imperative for law enforcement officers to report” the activities of lobbying groups, Muslim civil rights organizations and anti-war protest groups in their areas.

“This memo is not a plea for legitimate intelligence, and seems to endorse discrimination against Muslims,” said Caroline Fredrickson, Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office. “The idea that the tolerance advocated by the groups being targeted would be treated as a menace to American security demonstrates a disregard for civil liberties and a disdain for democracy itself. The kind of indiscriminate and unlawful investigations this bulletin calls for always results in a chilling effect on free speech and association.”

The federal government has facilitated the growth of a network of fusion centers since 9/11 to expand information collection and sharing practices among law enforcement agencies, the private sector and the intelligence community. There are currently 70 fusion centers in the United States.

"It should be obvious with the constant news of increased violence in Mexico that Texas needs law enforcement to focus on real criminal threats instead of targeting religious minorities and groups with unpopular political opinions." Rebecca Bernhardt, ACLU TX Policy Director said, "The North Central Texas Fusion Center should be reviewed to determine whether it can contribute to the serious public safety mission of Texas or not."

Proponents have claimed all fusion center personnel receive civil rights training, and that this training is sufficient to protect the privacy and civil liberties of Americans living in the communities where fusion centers operate, but this is obviously not the case. The ACLU has long warned that ambiguities regarding who controls these fusion centers and a complete lack of oversight over their intelligence activities would lead to violations like this.

“The Texas fusion center’s bulletin shows an unhealthy disregard for constitutional rights and democratic processes,” said Michael German, ACLU National Security Policy Counsel and former FBI Agent. “It demonstrates the lack of professionalism that exists at fusion centers and the severe lack of oversight at the state, local and federal levels. According to its website, North Central Texas Fusion System bulletins are disseminated to thousands of people in over a hundred different agencies, and this report directs law enforcement officers to ‘report’ on the political activities of advocacy groups. The web of connections it weaves – drawing parallels between Muslim civil liberties groups, lobbying organizations, peace activists, hip hop bands, a former congresswoman and even the U.S. Treasury Department – would be comical if not for the real consequences that these organizations and individuals might face.”

In 2007, the ACLU released a report entitled, “What’s Wrong With Fusion Centers?” which was updated last year. The report identifies specific concerns with fusion centers, including their ambiguous lines of authority, the troubling role of private corporations, the participation of the military, the use of data mining and the excessive secrecy surrounding the centers As a national trend continues to close down public information about this domestic intelligence network, it continues to grow out of control.Recent revelations of the Department of Homeland Security’s role in the Maryland State Police Department’s surveillance of peace groups have deepened the ACLU’s concerns, particularly because a DHS intelligence analyst is reportedly assigned to the North Central Texas Fusion System.

To read the ACLU's report on fusion centers, go to:www.aclu.org/fusion

Tucked away in a rented room at the Collin County Sheriff's office is a computer operation called the North Central Texas Fusion System.

According to its website, "The Fusion System is a data sharing and analysis system primarily focused on the prevention and early warning of natural, accidental and intentional disasters. The Fusion System is also used to support emergency responses, field operations, and investigations."

One of about 58 Fusion Centers nationwide, the NTFC is envisioned as a response to the call for better sharing of information and communications between different law enforcement agencies and first responders in the wake of the 911 terrorist attack.

The computers at the NCTFS are designed to not only share law enforcement and weather data, but to merge thousands of public, government and commercial databases into a tool that can, "detect and graphically display relationships between people, places, and events". In other words, to connect the dots on both demographic trends as well as on an individual's movements and communications.

The NCTFS publishes a weekly newsletter, the "Prevention Awareness Bulletin". According to the Fusion Center, it is distributed to over 1,500 individuals from over 200 different agencies.

Last week's Prevention Awareness Bulletin included a story titled, "Middle Eastern Terrorist groups and their supporting organizations have been successful in gaining support for Islamic goals in the United States and providing an environment for terrorist organizations to flourish."

The article warned law enforcement agencies to be "aware of and report" the legal activities of legal Muslim organizations under the pretext that these groups are lobbying to turn, "public and political support towards radical goals such as Shariah law and support of terrorist military action against Western nations."

It's unbelievable that a government financed intelligence operation is asking the police to report perfectly legal political activities of American citizens.

The article weaves together a few facts and internet rumors to paint a picture of a American Muslim goal to replace Christianity with Islam. In one case it quotes Omar Ahmad, a founder of The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) as telling a San Ramon Valley Herald reporter, "Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth."

CAIR and Ahmad deny he ever made the statement.

The newsletter article then uses that quote to infer a conspiracy to dominate American culture with, "Taken in that context, pushing an aggressive, pro-Islam agenda that's been increasingly successful in recent years takes on a new light". There follows such Islamic "agenda items" as foot baths in the cab drivers break room at an airport in Indiana.

In one paragraph the Fusion Center even accuses the United States Treasury Department with complicity by hosting a conference on the use of Shariah economic doctrine.

The article makes no real charge of terrorist activity by any mainstream Muslim organization, instead it fans the flames of Islamophobia by casting a very wide net of innuendo over the legitimate political activities of Americans who practice Islam. Terrorism is not a Christian vs Muslim battle, and attempts to fuel such fears lead only to prejudice, hate and fear.

Is the Fusion Center using huge computer systems teamed up with an intelligence network that has no real oversight to monitor protected political lobbying? It would seem so.

The implications for our American freedoms are chilling. Americans rightly cherish their liberty and their rights of religion, speech and to petition their government.

The article ends with a list of hyperlinked footnotes. Almost all links lead to far right wing anti-Muslim or neo-con activist sites. None are to official government agencies, which casts a real doubt on the validity of the intelligence gathering abilities of not only the newsletter, but the Fusion Center itself.

Bill

Notes:

The Prevention Awareness Bulletin, NCTFS Feb. 19, 2009

North Central Texas Fusion System homepage

Fusion Center Guidelines, US Justice Department, Aug. 2006

Fusion Centers: Issues and Options for Congress, Congressional Research Service, Jan. 2008

Centers Tap Into Personal Databases, Apr. 2008, The Washington Post

Narrowing the Focus, Texas Technology, Sept. 2007

Information Fusion Centers and Privacy, EPIC, Jun. 2008

What's wrong with Fusion Centers, ACLU, Dec. 2007

Fusion Centers in Texas: "What we have here is a failure to communicate", Grits for Breakfast, Jul, 2007

Fusion centers' might be scary if they actually work, Grits for Breakfast, Apr. 2008

Four potential risks to intelligence fusion centers, Homeland Stupidity, Jul. 2007

CCO Coverage of Fusion Center:
County pays ADB over $1.1 million in no-bid Fusion Center contracts, CCO, Dec. 2008

Commissioners to consider "no bid" contract for Fusion Center, CCO, Dec. 2008

While Plano was watching TV, what was the Fusion Center doing?,CCO, May 2008

Code Red: better late than never - or is it?, CCO, Apr. 2008

The Prevention Awareness Bulletin is edited by Anita Johnson - the Anita in "Anita and Dr. Bob" or ADB Consulting which has earned over a million dollars in federal grant money building the NCTFS. Anita and Dr. Bob (James R. Johnson) are the daughter-in-law and son of US Congressman Sam Johnson.

Since the newsletter is distributed in MS Word, it is possible to get information about the computer used to create the document. This last issue shows the newsletter was written on a computer owned by James R Johnson, Sony Electronics, Inc.

DART to receive $62 million in federal stimulus funds

Tuesday, February 24, 2009
By MICHAEL A. LINDENBERGER / The Dallas Morning News

DART President Gary Thomas said he expects to receive nearly $62 million in funds from the federal stimulus package, according to a message he sent to employees.

No decisions have been made about how those funds will be spent, though Dallas Area Rapid Transit officials have been evaluating a wide range of possibilities. The money will be used on capital projects that are already identified in the 20-year financial plan.

In a message sent to employees on Friday, Thomas said the agency had been told it would receive $61.5 million in formula funds and an additional $300,000 in rail modernization money.

“As many of you know, we've been following the progress of this legislation for several months and have identified a number of potential projects that could qualify for these funds,” Thomas wrote.

The next step is for the agency to make a request to the North Central Texas Council of Governments, which will be involved in administering the funds along with the Texas Department of Transportation and the Federal Transit Administration.

“We are also continuing to review the legislation to see if there are other sources of funding for us,” Thomas wrote.

The DART board of directors and finance committee each meet Tuesday, but there is no mention of deciding how to spend the money on either group's agenda.

Lara Kohl, spokeswoman for the North Central Texas Council of Governments, said the planning entity has been focused on how to spend the nearly $200 million in highway funding Dallas will receive, and has not yet focused on DART.

The federal money for transit is a small amount compared with more than $1 billion DART is spending on construction and other capital projects this year, its busiest ever.

link to article....

On Monday, The Texas Department of Transportation provided the Texas House Select Committee on Federal Economic Stabilization Funding information on its efforts to implement its portion of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), commonly known as the Economic Stimulus Package.

Collin County looks to get shortchanged once again by our good friends at TxDOT.

Out of a 20 page list of projects totaling over $2 billion, Collin County is included on only 3 of the smaller projects totaling $30 million. Based on population, the proposed spending for Collin County is only half of its fair share of the stimulus funds.

TxDOT's list will be cut in half, so it is very possible that out of a projected state total of $1.2 billion in federal stimulus spending, Collin County would receive nothing.

The 3 projects listed by TxDOT are:

• $27 million to widen US 380 from Lake Lavon to Farmersville.
• $2.5 million for intersection improvements on Preston Rd. @ Legacy.
• $485,000 to construct a left turn lane on SH5 @ FM 455.

Don't our legislators do anything to protect Collin County?

We have commissioners here who campaign for office based on their ability to forge relationships with legislators and state officials. What exactly is that influence getting us? Only screwed six ways from Sunday by TxDOT on pass-through financing, on SH121, and now on stimulus spending.

I'm starting to believe that Austin's only interest in Collin County is toll revenue and reliable Republican votes (votes that Austin doesn't have to work for).

Bill

List of Prioritized Proposed Projects given to the Select Committee

FromTxDOT's Stimulus Funding web page:

TxDOT released a list of transportation projects that would require $2.2 billion in stimulus funds that department staff will eventually narrow to projects requiring $1.2 billion. TxDOT also provided the committee with a list of maintenance projects that would require $508 million in stimulus money.

The committee was also provided with a list of $600 million in projects that could be funded through the state’s Proposition 14 bond initiative, a program created by the Texas Legislature.

The Texas Transportation Commission will meet in Austin on Wednesday, February 25, and Thursday, February 26. Wednesday’s commission meeting is scheduled to include a discussion of TxDOT’s work to prepare for the expenditure of stimulus funds. Thursday’s meeting is scheduled to include commission action on projects from the state’s share of stimulus funds and from the state’s Proposition 14 bond program.

The county commissioners, meeting as the Collin County Toll Road Authority, have spent a lot of time over the last month listening to staff presentations on the Outer Loop.

Monday, they took action, approving the preparation of full engineering plans for the 3-A,B,C & D sections of the proposed tollway.

Those sections, known as Phase 3 would connect the Dallas North Tollway with Central Expressway. The engineering plans are budgeted at $3.1 million. The court also approved doing preliminary survey work on the Phase 4 section that connects US 380 east of Farmersville with FM 6 between Nevada and Josephine. The cost of the survey work is expected to be about $700,000.

Late last year, the court approved engineering plans for Phase 1 which will connect US 75 with SH 121 north of Melissa. The engineering cost for Phase 1 was approved at $956 million. The court had also approved spending $10 million to aquire the land for the toll road.

The expected cost of the entire 53 mile Outer Loop project is expected to be almost $4 billion (in 2008 dollars). It is hoped that construction will begin in 2011 and probably won't be complete until after 2030.

One thing that came out in testimony during these last meetings is that the commissioners really have no idea how they are going to be able to finance the $4 billion price tag between now and 2030.

The county has $3.9 million available, of which the court approved spending $3.8 million yesterday. They anticipate being able to raise about $4 million from general revenue, and to divert about $10 million from bond funds.

Another $5 million was promised by the RTC from SH 121 money, but the commissioners court learned last week that the money could only be used for environmental studies. That leaves more than $3.9 billion of the $4 billion costs unfunded.

Nevertheless, it is "full steam ahead" for our planned Outer Loop Tollway.

In other action, after meeting in executive session, the court approved beginning a condemnation suit on one parcel of private land needed for the road. (They have the money for lawyers).

Bill

Notes:

February Outer Loop Update presentation, February 16, 2009

The Collin County Toll Road Authority, CCO, January 26, 2009

Outer Loop: County to seek legal action against property owners?, CCO, January 3, 2008

DMN-Outer Loop route gets a green light, CCO, December 15, 2006

Yesterday, the Collin County Commissioners did not approve their Auditor's request for a $5,000 software program needed to audit the county's large "enterprise" software systems. In his presentation to the court, Mr. Cozad said he needed the $5,000 ACL program in order to be able to examine, in real time, the veracity of the data that filtered down into the county's financial statements.

The commissioners closely questioned Cozad, a member of his staff and IT Director Caren Skipworth on the usefulness of the ACL software and on the difficulties in implementing the new audit procedures.

According to Skipworth, the Auditor would be required to get written permission from each elected department manager before he would be allowed to access their data. Cozad would also have to get permission and assistance from the IT department to set up each of the databases. The IT department would also require that the Auditor could not directly view the departmental data tables, but would have to use a replicated copy, even though the ACL program is designed for auditing and only views and does not interacts with the data it is looking at.

Wow!

After much discussion, Judge Self stated he would put off the vote until the court returned from executive (secret) session. However, when the court reconvened, no action was taken on Cozad's request.

One of the items listed for the executive session was a discussion with the lawyers on the county's appeal of Collin County vs. Collin County Auditor.

A month ago, the commissioners court refused to approve the same software package because the IT department had not evaluated it yet. This time, Ms. Skipworth had reviewed ACL and she told the court that the Auditor's use of ACL would enhance his ability to monitor the data, tables and permissions for the largest of the county's software systems. These large systems represent huge investments, over $20 million. The largest are Odyssey, which is used in the courts, and PeopleSoft? which is used by the HR department.

It boggles the mind that a supposedly independent Auditor is expected to grovel before those whose work he is supposed to verify.

I wonder, is he also required to kneel and beg, "Please, please can I look to see if you are stealing from the taxpayers? Please, please can I look at your work to see if your numbers are right? Please, please let me keep you honest."

Did this commissioners Court learn their management skills at Enron?

Bill

Notes:

Documents:
Cozad's letter to Judge Self and the Commissioners Court, dated November 25, 2008

Judge Calhoun's Final Judgment, dated October 15, 2008.

Collin County's Response to the Auditor's and intervenor's first traditional motion for partial summary judgment, August 4, 2008

Sworn Affidavit of Caren Skipworth, August 1, 2008

Don Cozad's request for Attorney General's opinion, dated April 3, 2008.

Coverage by the CCO and press:
Auditing - Collin County style, CCO January 22, 2009

Who gains from the county's suit against its auditor?, CCO November 18, 2008

Turf battle costs taxpayers over $300,000, CCO, November 9, 2008

Expensive turf war with taxpayer dollars grinds on, CCO, August 13, 2008

County auditor won’t have to answer deposition questions - McKinney Courier-Gazette August 12, 2008

Officials meet today in court over county's suit against its auditor, Don Cozad - McKinney Courier-Gazette August 11, 2008

Auditor alleges county Open Meetings violations - CCO June 11, 2008

Auditor asks for an attorney - CCO June 9, 2008

Who authorized the suit against the Auditor? - CCO May 28, 2008

County seeks declaratory judgment against auditor - McKinney Courier Gazette May 23, 2008

I protest yet another secret meeting - CCO May 20, 2008

Who's watching the store? (And the disk drives?) - CCO April 26, 2008

From a county press release issued today:

County Judge Keith Self, whose record on campaigning for transportation issues has proven to be pretty dismal, is leading a personal blog and email campaign against the "Texas Local Option Transportation" bills introduced in the Legislature.

In an email to supporters (and on his blog) Self charged that, "something must be done or a catastrophe will happen".

The local options bills (HB-9 and SB-855) would allow voters in a county to hold an election to tax themselves in order to build roads, rail or mobility projects.

Currently the voters have no ability to call a referendum on mobility projects.

His last foray into transportation elections was in the 2007 Bond Election, when Self campaigned against the bond package.

He wanted the county to use "pass through financing" from TxDOT to finance large construction projects, leaving the cities to pay for their own smaller secondary road improvements. His plan was a bad idea then and was soon proven to be a very, very bad idea, when not long after the election, the state killed the whole "pass through" program.

It would appear that Judge Self doesn't trust the citizens to vote in their own best interests. He and our commissioners would rather tax us without an election by using their newly created Collin County Toll Road Authority to build highways that tax by the mile.

No citizen voted for the Toll Road Authority. There has been no election or referendum on the Outer Loop - the commissioners court makes the decisions.

Remember, this commissioners court also campaigned for and approved the SH 121 toll scheme - evidently without reading the fine print. It was the fine print that enabled TxDOT to grab all $3.2 billion of the concession fee. Collin County has yet to see a dime.

Now there is much wrong with the 2 bills submitted to the legislature. There needs to be a lot of work done to insure that local county citizens are not expected to bear the entire burden of building their transportation infrastructure. Traditionally the Federal and State governments have shouldered the lion's share of the costs of major highway and inter-urban rail projects.

They still need to do so. We need to be assured that passage of these bills does not ease the pressure we must put on our state and national leaders to help us build for our future.

The trend of "pushing down" the responsibility for major infrastructure financing needs to be reversed. If we don't how long will it be before we require small cities like Melissa or Fairview to pay to improve Central Expressway?

Other parts of the bill will require a lot of analysis and compromise. The bills offer a wide range of fee and tax options that voters could choose from in the referendum. Some, like $1/hr parking fees need to get deep sixed. Nevertheless, these bills offer a way for Collin County citizens to become the masters of their own fate with regard to construction of commuter rail and major highways.

In his email, Self writes that, "This bill is structured with the belief that you, the voter, will vote for any tax that is put on a ballot with no discernment whether or not the added tax is absolutely necessary or not.". I can't speak for the bill's authors, but it seems that in any election the voters can say "Yes" or "No".

Why doesn't Self trust our citizens to make responsible choices? Because they voted for him?

Judge Self's reasoning become clearer when in his next sentence, he wrote, "Where is the review to make sure that every tax dollar is being spent as wisely as possible before we add yet another tax? Where is the prioritization to make sure that your tax dollars are being spent for the most important government functions?". Obviously he feels that the wisdom to decide resides solely in the Collin County Commissioners Court.

I'm going to disagree with that.

Bill

NOTES:

The text of HB-9

A recent Texas Municipal League Legislative Update contains a good "plain english" explanation of HB-9

An interesting analysis of HB-9 by Dallas Morning News' reporter Michael Lindenberger published Feb. 16.

Keith Self's Blog

Editorial: HOV headaches on Central

Friday, February 20, 2009
The Dallas Morning News Editorial Board

The HOV setup linking North Central Expressway and LBJ is a sore subject for most everybody who has laid eyes on it.

Motorists in the main lanes complain that there aren't enough HOV drivers to justify the lanes. Richardson drivers complain that they can't get in or out of the lanes in the city. Everyone complains that drivers who bust through the pylons make a mess on the roadway. People want the pylons gone and the lanes liberated.

The beefs range from legitimate to bogus. Either way, they're enough to give a useful traffic-management tool a huge public relations problem, and that has to be fixed.

The bottom line is that the lanes aren't going away, short of a redo of Central. Yes, they're a squeeze, owing to the width of the highway. But that die was cast when Tom Landry was coaching the Cowboys.

We disagree with those who see no value in lanes that encourage car pooling. The environmental and economic costs of congestion argue for more, not fewer, innovations to attack the problem.

As for the effectiveness of this innovation, the data show rising use – about three-fourths of the design capacity of 1,600 vehicles per lane at peak times.

Maximizing use of the remaining capacity is important. One way is signage that makes clear to drivers what they're getting into and where they can get out. Another is safe access in Richardson. Simulations show that a simple opening in the pylons would cause a safety hazard, so TxDOT? is exploring the feasibility of flyover ramps. Good. It makes sense to put Richardson-to-McKinney carpoolers in a lane that rewards efficiency.

Vehicle breakdowns in Central's HOV lanes – and on other HOVs in the area – are one of the biggest obstacles to smooth operation. Drivers on Central now must crash through the pylons to break free of tie-ups, creating a mess of broken plastic. It's good to see officials spacing out the pylons and looking to improve their design. A mess on the highway gives the impression of a slipshod program.

Still, the best sales job for HOV travel is done by satisfied customers who can attest to faster, less-stressful commutes. North Texas needs their success stories if we are to unclog our arteries

link to editorial...

Family Focus Parental Rights and Standards of Evidence in the Event of Divorce
by Dave Cary

Collin County Viewpoints:
In our schools and places of worship, in our homes, and at work, most residents of Collin County express a pride in America, in Family Values, Democracy, our Founders, and in our Constitution and way of life. We speak in Collin County of the belief that the values and principles espoused by our Founding Fathers and embodied in our Constitution have resulted in the most decent, prosperous and free nation in the history of mankind. God is in his heaven; all is right with the world.

Or is it? At the same time, Collin County has a burgeoning divorce industry. The fourth largest divorce firm in the nation has a major office in Collin County and the amount of money extracted from the destruction of our families and the destruction of the parent/child bond in Collin County is staggering. Clearly, we should examine why we have attracted such a powerful local presence of people who make money if our families are destroyed.

Standards of Evidence:
One reason may lie with the Standard of Evidence used by our courts to modify Parental Rights, the fundamental rights to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and control of our children free of unwarranted governmental interference. If it is too easy to attack Parental Rights in the event of divorce, we encourage the destruction of our families and the bonds between our parents and children with all the attendant social ills. This attracts people who have a vested interest in the destruction of our families. What then, are the Standards of Evidence? In civil cases (and divorce is treated as a civil case) there are basically two Standards of Evidence: a standard of a Preponderance of the Evidence and a standard of Clear and Convincing Evidence.

Preponderance of the Evidence:
The Preponderance of the Evidence, is the standard required in many civil cases. The standard is met if the proposition is more likely to be true than not true. Effectively, the standard is satisfied if there is even just a slightly greater than 50 percent chance that the proposition is true. When a judge modifies Parental Rights after deciding the evidence supports one side with a 50.001% probability, we have to ask ourselves whether this is rigorous enough to protect our Parental Rights and parent/child bonds from all but serious circumstances. If you think about it, this amounts to little more than a coin toss.

Clear and Convincing Evidence:
To prove a proposition by Clear and Convincing Evidence, the party with the burden of proof must demonstrate that it is substantially more likely than not that the proposition is in fact true. This is not the standard of Beyond a Reasonable Doubt used in criminal cases but it clearly is more than the close to crap shoot provided by the Preponderance of Evidence standard.

Which Standard Should Be to Used Modify or Attack Parental Rights?
After the above discussion on the Preponderance of the Evidence and Clear and Convincing Evidence standards, this is simple to answer. The answer depends on whether, when it comes to Parental Rights, we presume that our government knows best, subject to a parent proving the negative that it doesn’t; or whether we presume our parents know best, subject to the government proving its case. We have to error on one side or the other. Of the two, which side would our Founders error on? If it were your child, which side would you error on?

Most Collin County residents probably believe that governmental intervention should be one of the last resorts. Unfortunately, our county government and district courts behave as if they believe government intervention to attack Parental Rights in the event of divorce is the first course of action. Is this what we mean by Family Values?

What Does Our Constitution Say?
Parental Rights are fundamental rights protected by our Constitution akin to other fundamental rights such as the right to vote. This has been established by the US Supreme Court as recently as the year 2000 in the decision handed down in Troxel v. Granville. After all, if a government controls our children, it controls us and therein lies tyranny.

To review laws concerning the modification of fundamental rights such as Parental Rights, courts must use a standard of judicial review know as Strict Scrutiny, the most stringent standard of judicial review available. Under our Constitution, a law modifying Parental Rights (i) has to be justified by a compelling or crucial governmental interest, (ii) the law or policy must be narrowly tailored to achieve just that interest, and (iii) the law or policy must be the least restrictive means for achieving that interest.

All of our judges are suppose to evaluate whether our laws comply with our Constitution. We have to ask ourselves, do our courts comply with the requirements of the Constitution when it comes to modifying Parental Rights? It is hard to see how we can answer in the affirmative when we see how routinely and easily our courts modify Parental Rights. The question becomes tragically laughable when we realize our courts apply the coin toss standard of the Preponderance of the Evidence and that is against our Constitution. Laughable, except our children are placed at risk.

But Is it Even a Civil Case?
We treat divorces as civil cases. For some reason, we then extend that to Parental Rights and treat Parental Rights issues in the event of divorce as a civil issue. The two issues are very different and one may divorce one’s spouse but that does not mean the children should be forced to divorce the other parent. Marital disputes may be civil actions but Parental Rights are fundamental rights.

Can you name one other fundamental right which is challenged by civil action? There isn’t one except in extreme times such as during war. Fundamental rights are challenged by criminal action and that takes a higher Standard of Evidence: Beyond a Reasonable Doubt. This includes Parental Rights.

But isn’t it Different if it is Parent Against Parent Such as in Divorce?
There are those who say that it is fine for our courts to attack Parental Rights when it is parent against parent. To address this concept, we have to ask under what other circumstances we allow a person to attack his or her spouse with impunity. For example, if a person murders a stranger we know it is wrong. But if that same person murders her or his spouse, is that just fine? The answer is an obvious “no” and the answer is equally “no” when it comes to a spouse attacking another's Parental Rights except under unusual circumstances. It is always wrong to modify one’s Parental Rights except as we would modify any other fundamental right and our courts should quit encouraging it.

But What is in the Best Interest of the Children?
The answer partially lies in whether we should assume our government will do a better job of parenting or will we. Ask most children of divorce what they would want and they would tell us they would want most a close relationship with both parents. Additionally, numerous studies demonstrate that children are healthiest if, in the event of divorce, both parents are equally involved in their lives. There are even studies that indicate that the incidence of divorce would go down if we protected Parental Rights in the event of a divorce. It turns out it is remarkably destructive to a child to impair its parent/child bond except for extraordinary circumstances and we certainly should not do it lightly. Does this surprise us?

It seems the Founders of this country were smarter than we know as are our children. If only we were so smart. The best interest of the children is to protect Parental Rights and that requires a higher Standard of Evidence.

How Should we Approach Parental Rights in the Event of Divorce?
The answer is simpler than one would think and it involves protecting Parental Rights, not wantonly attacking them. In the event of divorce, both parents are to be instructed they are to be treated as equal citizens in accordance with the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. No Parental Rights will be modified except as freely agreed to by the parents themselves or if is found that one is unfit to be a parent using a high Standard of Evidence. Evidence of such unfitness would be established if one parent wantonly attacked the other parent’s Parental Rights. In other words, no action to attack Parental Rights should even be entertained by the courts unless a threshold Standard of Evidence has been met. Overnight, the number of destructive custody suits would drop like a rock.

The parents should come up with their own plan as after all, they are parents and they are the ones responsible for the care of these children. In those instances where both parents agree, the court should so order. In those areas where they disagree, the court should divide things equally, including child custody. The courts’ role is really to enforce the parents’ agreement and protect Parental Rights. If we take this approach, think of the money we would save; think of the societal destruction we would avoid; think of the children who would be better off.

We often bandy about praise in honor of Family Values, the Founders of our country, and our form of democracy embodied in that sacred document, the US Constitution. For our democracy, our Founders mutually pledged their Lives, their Fortunes, and their sacred Honor. The question arises as to whether we are worthy of the Founders who proceeded us; whether these words of praise are just empty words or whether we mean them. If we don’t follow these words, we don’t mean them. And if we don’t mean them, we can’t be that shining city on a hill, the last best hope for all human kind.

We need to respect Parental Rights by requiring a high Standard of Evidence before we modify them under all circumstances; we need to tell our court officials to do so; we need to instruct our leaders, whether political, religious, or other, to do so.

Dave Cary

From the City of Frisco
www.friscotexas.gov

FIRST 2009 TOWN HALL MEETING TO BE HELD MONDAY, FEBRUARY 23

(February 19, 2009) How does the City of Frisco measure up? Find out at the city’s first Town Hall meeting of 2009 on Monday, February 23. The economy and its impact on the city’s budget, regional mobility and Census 2010 are among the topics to be discussed.

The meeting will be held in the City Hall council chambers of the George A. Purefoy Municipal Center, 6101 Frisco Square Boulevard. The meeting begins at 7 p.m. and wraps up at 9 p.m. Residents who attend the Town Hall meeting will receive a free ‘Frisco’ tape measure to help you with your spring home improvement projects.

Learn more about Frisco’s financial forecast and what the city is doing to meet economic challenges.

Jeff Behler, Deputy Regional Director with the U.S. Census Bureau, will discuss Census 2010 and Tom Shelton, with North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG), will speak about regional transportation. City staff will also provide updates on local road improvement and construction projects, as well.

Learn more about the Frisco Housing Rehabilitation Program and find out if you or your neighbor qualifies for help. Hear your neighbors’ concerns and ideas about how citizens and city staff can work together to grow healthy, sustainable neighborhoods when city staff gives a briefing about the first Congress of Neighborhoods meeting.

Learn the latest on the development of our city’s Hike and Bike Trail Master Plan and get a progress report on the tri-city Arts of Collin County project from Mike Simpson, Executive Director, Arts of Collin County.

Town Hall meetings last two hours and are held three times each year. The next two Town Hall meetings are scheduled for June 1 and October 5.

Its very unusual for a county to begin redistricting before the federal census.
But some on the Collin County Commissioners Court do not want to wait until 2011 to redraw the commissioners and justice of the peace boundaries. The argument is that there is such a large population disparity between some of the commissioners precincts, that it is unfair to the voters to make them wait until the decennial census.

So the county wants to generate its own population statistics and not wait.

The first federal "enumeration" as the Constitution calls the census was back in 1790. Since then there have been 21 censuses. In the 230+ tears since our independence only in those 21 years have all the voting districts in the nation equaled or been 'balanced' with the census data. In the other 212 years of our history, the districts have been out of balance with the data. Yet we do not redistrict every year.

We don't redistrict at will because for a local government to create its own statistics and use them to set the geographic boundaries of its own elected officials is opening the Pandora's box of opportunism - inviting self-serving politicians to manipulate the data and create fraudulent districts.

Using census data makes sense.
It is impartial and independent of local pressures. It is universally accepted and will be upheld in any court challenge. The Census Bureau is the acknowledged expert in counting people - it has a rigorous methodology, a transparent process, numerous checks and balances and scientific validity.

Can locally generated data hope to meet such a high standard? I think not. It was only a few weeks ago that the press was revealing highly suspect population estimates from the City of Melissa.

According to press reports the mayor of Melissa was counting water meters and multiplying that count by a "resident per meter" factor he had devised. The result was in no way scientifically valid. Instead it was comic. Could the same thing happen countywide?

I spent some time today looking at the process which the county proposes to use to estimate the precinct by precinct population data needed to redistrict. Rest assured, the county is not counting water meters, but they are using the same mathematical method followed by the Mayor of Melissa.

The county's GIS Department obtained the listing of all properties from the Central Appraisal District. Each property description comes with a code describing if it is 'single-family residential', 'homestead', multifamily, etc. The GIS Department then assigned to each code a factor - for example 3.9 people per single family homestead. (These factors were drawn from historical statistics.) Multiply the properties times the factors, add them all up, and viola! you have population data much better than counting water meters.

There are some real problems with this approach to estimating population.
First, it is not verified or tested. No one is going out and knocking on doors as the census bureau does to verify that the mathematical assumptions are really correct. Neither has this method been "backtracked" to year 2000 to see if it even would have worked then.

Second, the goal of GIS is to be as accurate as they can with, as they describe it, "limited resources". The goal should be to be as close to what the census will report, but there is not any work being done to normalize the data to census. The problem is that statistics lie. They chase a moving target. for example, in the time it takes me to write this piece, the population of Collin County will have changed.

At least 4 different organizations estimate population in the county. In the Spring of each year, the Council of Governments releases its population estimates. And then in September the Texas State Data Center releases its estimates. The county has its estimate, and then there is the census bureau.

According to GIS, the COG data usually estimates the highest number of people in the county and the Census the lowest, with the Texas Data Center somewhere in between. GIS believes its count will fall in between COG and the State, but they can't predict how different they will be from the actual US Census.

Voting districts need to be drawn so that they almost exactly equal each other in population. Judge Self noted at the last court that these precincts needed to be within 1/2% to 1% of each other.

The problem is that when the real census data comes in, the districts won't match anymore. Simple math proves that if the county data is 95% accurate and the districts were drawn to 99% accuracy, then when the census data is received, these districts will now only be 94% correct and will have to be redrawn.

So how will redistricting actually help the citizens?
I don't see how it will. First, if the lines are redrawn now, and then again in 2011, some voters could find themselves having lived in 3 different commissioners precincts in two years, all without packing up and moving. This will create confusion and hard feelings.

Second, the most out of balance precinct is Precinct 3 (Joe Jaynes). Because of population growth, precinct 3 now holds over 33% of the counties voters. But redistricting now won't help those voters at all. The precinct 3 commissioner's next election isn't until 2012, AFTER the 2010 census.

Third, the proposed counting methodology probably won't survive a court challenge. If there is a close primary or or November race, the whole election results could be held up or at worse redone.

The law requires that the Commissioners Precincts be fairly and accurately drawn to conform with the last census. The present precincts, as out of balance as they are, meet that requirement. Any redrawing of lines prior to the next enumeration will by its very nature not meet that legal test. Likewise, when Texas redrew its congressional district lines in 2003, it used the older 2000 census data. Attempts to use more current estimated data were rebuffed by the legislature and the Attorney General. That redistricting scheme went all the way to the US Supreme Court, which upheld the use of the census data.

Redistricting is a political act.
Politicians redistrict for one of two reasons, one because the law makes them do it every ten years or two to use the new boundaries to gain a political advantage.

It is rare to redistrict outside of the ten year census. As I mentioned, the last important time it was done was in 2003. That attempt did hold up, but not before it went all the way to the US Supreme Court. Before it was all over the US Speaker of the House had to resign his seat in congress.

Tom Delay was an ambitious politician, jockeying for advantage. He used the redistricting effort to increase his party's representation in congress.

So in looking at Collin County's "out of cycle" redistricting effort, one has to ask, "Who is pushing it and what do they want to gain?"

It was obvious in Monday's Commissioners Court meeting that the primary driver of this redistricting effort is County Judge Keith Self.

Self is elected countywide, so he can't be trying to enhance his own electability.

Two commissioners seats are up for re-election in 2010. Jerry Hoagland in Precinct 2 and Kathy Ward in Precinct 4. It's no secret that Judge Self recruited candidates to challenge Commissioners Phyllis Cole and Joe Jaynes in 2008. His candidate did unseat Ms. Cole. Self is ambitious and he's proven to be willing to go toe to toe with an incumbent fellow Republican to gain control of the court.

It's also no secret that Jerry Hoagland would love to get rid of Keith Self and that Self has similar feelings against Hoagland. So I'd be looking to see what advantage Self believes he can gain by redrawing Hoagland's precinct. I suspect that when you get down to the real reason for this whole redistricting thing, what you'll find is Self trying to best Hoagland - or at least keep Jerry off balance.

It's got nothing to do with building precincts for a 'one man, one vote' advantage to the voters.

It's political.

Bill

MCG - Warrant search starts today

Monday, February 16, 2009
Danny Gallagher / McKinney Courier-Gazette

McKinney and surrounding Collin County cities warn that delinquent warrant holders “could be arrested anytime” during this week’s state-wide warrant roundup

Local police agencies across Collin County and the state of Texas are looking to clear out any outstanding warrants from their books this week.

McKinney and surrounding Collin County cities are participating in this week’s “Third Annual Great Texas Warrant Roundup” as part of a statewide effort to clear out delinquent traffic violations and deter future violations and delinquencies, according to statements released by the City of McKinney and the North Central Texas Council of Governments.

The warrant searches started Monday with over 200 local and county jurisdictions participating in the statewide effort. The roundup will also include officers from local police precincts as well as sheriff’s deputies, justices of the peace, constables’ offices and municipal enforcement officers, according to NCTCOG.

The effort will focus mainly on class C misdemeanor and traffic violation warrants that have gone unpaid. McKinney city officials noted, however, that officers will attempt to serve any outstanding warrant on their books.

“The effort in McKinney will primarily target people with outstanding class C warrants, although all warrants are subject to be served,” said city of McKinney spokeswoman Anna Folmnsbee. “Anyone with an outstanding warrant or citation is urged to take care of it as soon as possible to avoid arrest.”

McKinney’s Municipal Court and Marshal’s Office have participated in the annual roundup since it started in 2007. This year’s effort will include additional officers from local local law enforcement agencies including the McKinney Police Department and McKinney’s Citizens on Patrol programs.

McKinney City Marshal Tim Rich said the designated week gives them the time and resources to broaden their search and clear out warrants that otherwise would be hard to serve during their normal course of duties.

"Because of the success of the roundup the last two years, we are broadening our target this year,” Rich said. “Anyone with an outstanding warrant could be arrested at any time of the day or night - at home or at work.”

read more....

Previous CCO posts on toll road warrants:

DO - For Whom the Toll Bells, Jan. 19, 2009

NTTA responds to "Holy fugitive, Batman", Dec. 31, 2008

Holy Fugitive, Batman, Dec. 24, 2008

Despite problems, HOV use is up on North Central Expressway

Monday, February 16, 2009
By THEODORE KIM / The Dallas Morning News

The access points are few. Lanes are narrow and often strewn with debris.

"Some years ago, transportation experts recommended that engineers reserve as much as 30 feet of road width for the project, leaving room for a shoulder and concrete barriers. The state proposed a reversible lane separated by concrete barriers that could serve traffic in one direction depending on the time of day.

State engineers later agreed to build permanent northbound and southbound lanes at the behest of the city of Richardson. As many people commute to the suburbs as to the region's core, the city argued."

Jimmy Bortzfield endures it all because the high occupancy vehicle lanes on North Central Expressway cut his trip time.

"The HOV lane is needed, but we need to be able to use it," said Bortzfield, 27, a Plano engineer who used the lane daily until recently.

Fourteen months after opening, Central's HOV lanes have been plagued by design glitches, costly maintenance and spotty enforcement. Many local leaders believe the lanes, which serve a busy stretch north of Dallas, need an overhaul.

"I don't think the HOV lanes have operated to our expectations," said Michael Morris, transportation director for the North Central Texas Council of Governments.

Still, motorists are using them to save money on gas by car pooling and to sidestep chronic jams. Rush hour use is up, and the numbers are expected to grow.

"Sometimes, people are a little intimidated by something if they haven't done it before," said Gary C. Thomas, president and executive director of Dallas Area Rapid Transit. "Once they figure it out, we'll see increases."

The project is an important yardstick in the effort to curb traffic and air pollution in North Texas through car pooling and van pooling. That poses a challenge in a region built around automobile travel.

Test route
But the stakes go beyond ride sharing. The Central Expressway project is part of a 50-mile network of car pool lanes built with federal money.

And plans call for more, including lanes that solo drivers can use for a fee. Texas, in fact, is planning such toll lanes on many roads, including Interstates 30, 35E and 635.

North Central Expressway has proven an ideal test route. The 14-mile stretch from I-635 to the Allen-Plano border is a busy commuting pipeline between Dallas and its burgeoning northern suburbs.

Separated from the rest of traffic, the lanes are meant to be an express option for long-distance commuters.

So far the $19 million project, built by the Texas Department of Transportation and maintained by DART, has had mixed success.

An estimated 1,250 vehicles per hour use the lanes at the busiest times. That is up more than 70 percent from when the lanes first launched in December 2007, traffic counts show. All told, about 18,000 passengers a day rode the lanes this past December, up from 12,700 at launch.

Drivers shaved an average of 10 minutes or more off rush hour trips, said Cynthia White, a TxDOT spokeswoman.

Obstacles
But the growth has come despite myriad problems and complaints about poor enforcement of cheaters, few entrances and exits, and plastic barriers that spawn hazardous debris.

DART officials, in charge of patrolling for violators, said they have had a tough time.

"You can't patrol that thing because you can't get in and out," said Raymond Noah, a DART board member.

Some find the layout confusing. For instance, the lanes offer direct access to I-635 west. But those seeking to head south or east must exit and wait at as many as two traffic lights.

Moreover, motorists can enter the lanes only at the endpoints and in Plano near Parker Road.

Engineers purposely limited access in Richardson and other spots to keep traffic moving. But the lack of exits has puzzled some drivers.

TxDOT has added to the confusion by closing a southbound section in Plano for a year because of construction at Parker Road.

Even the plastic pylons have proved problematic. The sticks and their fragile bases shatter easily when hit, creating maintenance headaches and, in some cases, endangering driver safety.

Reckless motorists use gaps in the pylons to weave into and out of the lanes. Two people have died in the past year because of accidents caused by weaving, TxDOT said.

The problems have taken a toll. Though statistics offer a portrait of growth, the lanes appear empty most of the time. They draw but a fraction of the roughly 200,000 vehicles that use the expressway daily.

"It's a project that was calculated to do something. And it didn't work," Noah said.

Tight squeeze
Many of the problems seem to stem from the lanes' narrow design.

Some years ago, transportation experts recommended that engineers reserve as much as 30 feet of road width for the project, leaving room for a shoulder and concrete barriers. The state proposed a reversible lane separated by concrete barriers that could serve traffic in one direction depending on the time of day.

State engineers later agreed to build permanent northbound and southbound lanes at the behest of the city of Richardson. As many people commute to the suburbs as to the region's core, the city argued.

Fitting the twin lanes was a squeeze, said Bill Hale, the transportation department's Dallas district engineer. The space for each lane is about half as wide as the ideal girth, making shoulders and concrete barriers impossible.

read more....

In tough economic times, local governments' budgets get strained - taxpayers are unwilling to bear increased burdens and so it is tempting for local policy makers to look for new sources of funding.

Some look to law enforcement as a revenue generator.

Texans have long despised speed traps and other attempts to use the power of the justice system to pay for basic governmental services.

Here in Collin County, many still remember the Texas Rangers swooping down on tiny Lavon, which at one point had 13 police officers writing tickets as fast as they could. In response, the Texas Legislature prohibited small towns under 5,000 population from using fines for more than 30% of their budget.

Yet even so, abuses abound.

Red light cameras and speed cameras are frequently seen as profit centers.

Recently, the Dallas Morning News revealed that over 50% of Dallas County's budget was gained from fines and fees. There are reports from East Texas of a county where half the DA's budget comes from seized and confiscated assets, even though most of those who's assets are seized aren't charged or convicted.

Collin County says it is not like Dallas. According to the 2009 budget, Collin County gets less than 2% of its General Fund revenue from fines.

The 2009 budget notes that the General Fund gets about 13% of its revenue from user fees. Other funds, such as the much smaller Public Works Fund received over $13 million from fees. The General Fund accounts for approximately $150 million of the county's $250 million dollar budget.

There are hundreds of fees the county charges citizens and businesses. In fact Collin County's Schedule of Fees is well over 200 pages long.

But while this county does not have a history of using law enforcement as a tool to gain revenue, it is still troubling that in the documentation for redistricting the Justice of the Peace Precincts, the county prepared profit/loss statistics for each JP court.

One chart, titled "Justice of the Peace Net Revenue 2007-2008", shows the lions share of the revenue coming from Precinct 1 in 2007 and Precinct 4 in 2008. In 2008 the JP courts sent over $3 million to the county's coffers. Just over $2 million of that was from these 2 courts.

As far as bringing in a "net gain" (profit), once again it was Precincts 1 and 4 that turned a profit for the county.

The reasons for Precinct 4 numbers are obvious when you factor in the revenue and warrants for "failure to pay toll" to the NTTA. Out of the 35,000 warrants issued by all 5 JP courts in 2007, Precinct 4 was responsible for over 24,000 of them.

Precinct 1's profit was, in part, caused by the fact that it is the only court that doesn't pay rent (it meets in a county building).

Precinct 3 doesn't show a profit in part because it handles a huge number of unprofitable truancy cases. Precinct 2 serves just too few people to cover its costs.

The commissioners court will consider 7 alternate redistricting plans. A few will cause elected Justices to live outside their distrcts. Unfortunately, none of the plans indicate population data.

Nevertheless, the question remains, is "profit" an appropriate measure of a JP Court's performance, or for that matter, of any court?

Bill

Friday night at 5:35 PM, the county clerk posted the agenda and packet for a special session of the Collin County Commissioners Court meeting Monday at 6 PM.

With this very short public notice, the commissioners court has declared its intention to redistrict commissioners, justice of the peace and constable district boundaries.

The agenda contains Item #6 "Al-29674 Consideration, discussion and any action regarding Commissioners redistricting". The words, "any action" generally mean that the court is ready to take action and final votes.

It's been no secret that the commissioners want to redistrict. The present boundaries were set after the 2000 census and are in real need of balancing.

When the present districts were drawn, they were pretty much balanced in population - they're not any longer:

In the commissioners packet for Monday's meeting are 3 proposed district plans. Unfortunately it is virtually impossible to really analyze any of these plans because the maps furnished are highly stylized and contain no street names or voting precinct numbers. Total population numbers are indicated, and they show that none of these proposed plans goes very far in equalizing the population in the districts.

These 3 plans seem designed to protect each commissioner's voter base rather than granting every voter an equal voice on the court. Reaffirming the citizens' right to "one man, one vote" under the "Equal protection clause" of the Constitution, the US Supreme Court ruled back in 1965 in Avery vs. Midland County that Texas counties had to apportion districts by population. Obviously Judge Self and the commissioners never got the memo.

Normally, the commissioners and other districts are not even redrawn until after the elections department proposes new voting precinct boundaries. This is because state law requires that commissioners precinct lines must follow the voting precinct lines and not subdivide them.

The court has recognized that the voting precinct lines need to be redrawn. More so than the commissioners or Justice of the Peace districts, these voting precincts are way out of balance in population.

State law requires that voting precincts be balanced, and that no precinct have less than 100 nor more than 5,000 registered voters.

Currently, Collin County has 162 voting precincts. 12% of them are so out of range that they are illegally constituted. The smallest has zero registered voters, the largest, 9,109 voters. In all, 7 precincts contain less than 100 voters and 12 encompass more than 5,000.

Drawing new voting precincts around commissioners boundaries is burdensome and can not allow for a true equalization of voters. It only makes sense to draw the smallest subdivisions first, then use those boundaries to redraw the larger commissioners district lines.

Other aspects of these redistricting proposals make the whole process suspect:

• The lack of substantial notice. Posting after hours before a weekend for a Monday meeting, makes it look as if the court has something to hide.
• The lack of notice to both political parties, with an opportunity to participate, leads one to assume these maps are the product of a "back room deal".
• The lack of details, such as boundaries and precinct numbers keep interested citizens and parties from having the ability to analyze the maps, and make substantive suggestions.
• The lack of any public hearings indicate that the court is not interested in citizen, candidate or political party input. They seem only to be interested in preserving their perquisites.

The Collin County Observer calls on the Commissioners Court to first approve the new voter precincts before presenting new commissioners' precinct maps. We believe the court should hold public hearings on the redistricting plans. Further we ask that the court make available detailed maps and demographic data well in advance of any public hearing or final vote.

Before any redistricting plan can be put in place, the court is required to submit the plan to the US Justice Department for certification under the Voting Rights Act.

If the Commissioners Court refuses to hold public meetings and release detailed maps, then it behooves the voters to avail themselves of their right to file protests of any adopted plan with the Justice Department.

Bill

The Collin County Commissioners Court will meet Monday, February 16, 2009 at 6:00 PM at the "old" Collin County Courthouse at 210 S. McDonald St. in McKinney.

The Commissioners' Courtroom is on the 6th floor and has limited seating capacity.

Public comments are permitted. Forms to request an opportunity to comment are available at the door.

The Commissioners' Redistricting is agenda item #6.

Barbara Walters is the president of the Texas Democratic Women of Collin County, and Bea Warner is the outgoing secretary of the TDWCC. Both ladies traveled to Austin this week to take part in Collin County Days at the legislature. They've asked me to publish their impressions of the 2 day event.

I am pleased to do so

Bill

Collin County Legislative days

By Barbara Walters
and Bea Warner

Two of us from TDWCC attended Collin County Legislative Days in Austin 2/9-10. It was a well-organized and informative event with: Gov. Perry speaking at lunch and all County Commissioners present. Senator Shapiro (SD8) and Senator Estes (SD30) spoke to us about their committee assignments (Education and Agriculture respectively). TX Representatives from all CC House Districts were there, as well as mayors and city council members from the major cities. Several speakers commented on the great gains of Democrats in Collin County and in Texas and how people are looking to this tri-county area for big changes and see our turnout in Nov. helping to move Texas to a two-party system.

Health Care Panel highlights: Panelists were: Arlene Wohlgemuth, Founder of Three Point Strategies, Devon Herrick, PhD, National Center for Policy Analysis, Anne Dunkleberg, Center for Public Policy Priorities. Their focus was on the rising costs of Medicaid and Medicare for Texas as well as physician and nurse shortages. They speculated about the impact of the economic stimulus package for Texas and what that will do to help / hinder the state budget. All three are against socialized medicine and government bureaucracies. They advocated health saving accounts or retail medicine solutions, but none of them answered the question, "Who will pay for those who can't?"

Transportation Panel highlights: Panelists were: Deidre Delisi, Chair of the Texas Transportation Commission, appointed by Gov. Perry through 2013 and Steven Polunsky, Committee Director of the Senate Transportation and Homeland Security Committee led by Sen. Corona (R-Dallas) and vice-chair Sen. Kirk Watson (D-Austin). We were impressed that 16 issues were addressed during the interim between legislative sessions. Funding is a big issue whether through bonds or the gas tax. Collin County attendees are concerned about the $2.1 billion being held hostage by TxDOT and the continued diversion of gas tax revenues for non-transportation needs.

Workforce Development Commission Highlights: Panelists were Doug Ridge of the Tx Workforce Commission and McGregor Stephenson of the Tx Higher Education Coordination Board. They attribute Texas’ still relatively strong economy to effective linkage between businesses moving into areas like Collin County and the educational system’s ability to train the workers needed at all levels before a given company even opens its doors. Upcoming sectors of economic development include nuclear and wind power and biotech. Our biggest competitors are Brazil, Eastern Europe and Ireland.

Taxes and Spending Highlights: Panelists were Michael Quinn Sullivan, President and CEO of Empower Texas (a PAC), Mary Katherine Stout, Director of Budget, Planning and Policy (Governor’s Office) and Will Newton, Executive Director of the National Federation of Independent Business/Texas. Panel members were like-minded re: the need to preserve what’s left of the “Rainy Day Fund” after it’s been dipped into to pay a roughly six billion dollar shortfall in the state budget. Shortfall, they say, was due to the enactment of the ‘gross margins tax’ in an (unsuccessful) attempt to reduce property taxes.

Over breakfast we got to hear bipartisan intelligence from Harvey Kronberg of the Quorum Report and Ross Ramsey of Texas Weekly. They definitely see the two-party system returning to Texas. The almost-even split in the House: 75 Republicans (plus Speaker) and 74 Democrats, in a year when Gov. Perry and Sen Hutchison will be looking at everything they say through the lenses of their gubernatorial race, is going to make the TX Legislature a very exciting and unpredictable show!

The Collin County Observer questioned the request for the armored car in Cities queuing at the trough published on February 8. We are glad to see the press picking up on the issue.

Bill

Frisco requests armored car from stimulus check

Thursday, February 12, 2009
By STEVE STOLER / WFAA-TV

FRISCO — Hundreds of cities across the country are asking the federal government to pay for a slew of projects, including zoos, museums, a polar bear exhibit and even a water park ride.

It's all part of the U.S. mayors economic stimulus proposal to congress.

So what are North Texas cities are asking for?

The City of Allen's wish list includes items you'd expect: A new water tower, more space at the animal shelter, a training center for police and firefighters and $20 million to help build the Collin County performing arts hall.

But take a look at Frisco's $259 million request: Among the road projects is an armored carrier for the police department.

"The better we can be prepared to handle a crisis incident or a high-threat situation, the better off the citizens of Frisco are going to be," said Ray Jewett, from the Frisco police tactical unit.

Frisco's mayor says with all his city's sports venues and schools, it's a smart idea to have an armored carrier.

But some folks argue Frisco is already safe; it's ranked the 16th safest city in the country, based on the number of murders, rapes, robberies and other major crime.

"They need that tool to go in and extract an injured citizen or for protecting themselves when they go into a dangerous situation," Mayor Maher Maso said. "I'm happily putting that on our list of needs."

Frisco taxpayer Mike Devore says he's all for new roads — but not the armored car.

"When I think of an armored personnel carrier, I think of a high-crime area. Frisco doesn't exactly fit that bill. I would think there's better uses to spend the capital," he said.

The Lone Star Foundation keeps a close eye on public policy. The chairman of the group, David Hartman, calls the armored car foolish spending. He says it's not helping people get back to work, and ultimately it's taxpayers who are footing the bill.

watch video and read more.....

Joe Straus, the new Speaker of the Texas House of Representatives published his list of committee appointments today.

The Collin County delegation lost 2 chairmanships while picking up one.

The local winner was Plano's Brian McCall, who gained the chair of the powerful Calendars Committee.

As expected, Parker's Jodi Laubenberg lost her gavel on the Public Health committee.

Rep. Jerry Madden of Plano was also demoted. He will not be chairing the Corrections Committee. However, Madden will continue to have a powerful voice in prison and justice reform issues as he remains on the Corrections Committee and will serve as its Vice-Chair. In an article on Burkablog, Texas Monthly's Paul Burka notes that Madden and the new chair Rep. Jim McReynolds, (D-Lufkin) will be able to work together smoothly.

Rep. Ken Paxton from McKinney was a big looser - Straus stripped him of both his committee Vice-Chairmanships.

Here are the committee appointments of the Collin County delegation to the 81st Texas Legislature:

Rep. Jodi Laubenberg

• Local & Consent Calendars
• Natural Resources
• Public Health

Rep. Jerry Madden

• Corrections, Vice Chair
• Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence

Rep. Brian McCall

• Calendars, Chair
• Culture, Recreation & Tourism
• Higher Education

Rep. Ken Paxton

• Land & Resource Management
• Ways & Means

Sen. Craig Estes

• Agriculture & Rural Affairs, Chair
• Business & Commerce
• International Relations & Trade
• Natural Resources, Vice Chair
• Veteran Affairs & Military Installations
• Select Comm. on Base Realignment and Closure

Sen. Florence Shapiro

• Administration
• Education, Chair
• Finance
• Transportation & Homeland Security

It would seem that Madden and McCall will be able to wield considerable influence in the 81st, while both Paxton and Laubenberg have been sent to well deserved exiles in Siberia.

Both local state senators will chair important senate committees: Sen. Shapiro retained her gavel in the Senate Education Committee and Sen. Estes (whose sprawling 30th Sen. District is mostly rural) will chair the newly created Agriculture & Rural Affairs Committee.

In the opinion of this writer, both Speaker Straus and Lt. Governor Dewhurst did a reasonable job in their committee appointments. If Collin County citizens want more influential representation in the next legislature, those voters will just have to elect better representatives.

Bill

Notes:
List of all Texas House committees and members
List of all Texas Senate committees and members

Today is the 200th birthday of perhaps our greatest president, Abraham Lincoln.

In remembrance of President Lincoln's birthday, we reproduce here his 2nd inaugural address:

Chuck Bloom is a former publisher-owner-editor of several Texas community newspapers for more than 25 years before retiring, winner of dozens of journalism awards and former president of regional press groups. He published this piece today in his blog. The latest statistics show the unemployment rate in Collin County rose to 5.5% in December.
Bill

The state of things to come

I’d like to report to you on what will become an increasing sight here in Collin County, Texas, USA, one of the wealthier counties in Texas.

On Tuesday (Feb. 10), there was a relatively small job fair held at the Plano Centre, a small convention facility, sponsored by dice.com, a fairly new online job search site. In all, there were 11 companies represented, including the likes of Raytheon, Lennox, City of Dallas, Dallas Federal Reserve Bank, Region 10 Education Center (TEA), e-rewards, a few consulting firms and others.
This space was reserved prior to recent layoffs at Texas Instruments and other North Texas companies so organizers obviously did not know the size of the crowd to expect.

The event started at 11 a.m., but at 10:45 a.m., there was already a very long line waiting for the doors to open (several hundreds of unemployed job seekers). The room employed soon was filled to the gills with people waiting in line for more than two HOURS just to drop off a resume (accepting no applications, except on line but didn’t tell anyone) with one firm.

By 1 p.m., the procession to ENTER the Plano Centre wrapped around the building, not counting the crowd inside the lengthy hallway, trying to get into the room. Some estimates had more than 2,000 people looking for jobs at this event.
My wife was one of those involved and kept bumping into former Texas Instruments colleagues – all trying to do the same thing – find a new working life.

Such scenes will be repeated over and over and over as reality comes to Collin County – the weakening and worsening economy is striking at the heart of exurban America, as represented by cities like Plano, Frisco, Allen and McKinney. Since Texas admits the affects of the national recession are delayed before appearing in this state, we are only beginning to witness what the rest of the nation already knows.

Times are tough and about to get MUCH tougher before it gets better.

Fortunately, for this household, my diligent spouse has managed to obtain one of the rare nuggets that others tried so hard to mine – a job interview (with the city of Dallas - but not YET official; no one is returning phone calls and she is getting antsy about it). She was instantly the envy of others; merely wishing to have someone consider them for a new job, let alone hire them.

Such is life is the NEW America RIF (reduction in force … or … rising in fear).

Chuck Bloom

From a press release issued by Greg Abbott, Texas Attorney General:

Attorney General Abbott Launches Restitution Program For Countrywide Customers

Lender settles investigations in Texas, 10 other states to resolve deceptive lending allegations

AUSTIN - Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott today launched a restitution program that will make $7.46 million available to eligible Countrywide Financial Corp residential mortgage customers. Though the State’s 2008 agreement with Countrywide will provide $345 million in total benefits to Texas homeowners, the restitution announced today is specifically set aside for Countrywide customers who lost their homes to foreclosure. Last year, the attorney general initiated an investigation into allegations that Countrywide encouraged homeowners to accept loans they could not afford, failed to fully disclose risky loan terms to borrowers, and wrote loans for unqualified borrowers in an effort to increase market share.

“The restitution program announced today provides financial assistance to Countrywide customers who lost their homes,” Attorney General Greg Abbott said. “Last year we investigated Countrywide and reached a sweeping agreement that included loan modification opportunities for nearly 30,000 Texas homeowners. With today’s announcement, we are implementing the final portion of our agreement and making restitution funds available to Texans whose homes were lost to foreclosure.”

The state’s settlement with Countrywide included the following:

• $7.46 million in restitution for Countrywide's Texas customers who lost their homes to foreclosure--or whose payments were 120 days behind as of October 6, 2008;

• $335 million in loan modifications for about 30,000 Texans; and

• About 1,400 Texans who are in default – or are likely to be in default – on their subprime mortgages and who “voluntarily and appropriately” turn over their residence in the “Relocation Assistance Program,” are eligible to receive up to $2,000. The Relocation Assistance Program is expected to provide $2.8 million in benefits to Texas homeowners.

Under the agreement’s home loan modification program, eligible home owners can modify the terms of their residential loans so that monthly mortgage payments are more affordable. Modified loan terms will vary according to each home owner’s circumstances. The potential modifications include interest rate freezes, interest rate reductions, loan term extensions, conversions from variable to fixed rate loans, and principal reductions. Eligible borrowers who participate in the program will not be charged late fees, loan modification fees, foreclosure fees, or pre-payment penalties.

Bank of America, which acquired Countrywide last year, will distribute to eligible homeowners program application forms. Texans who believe they may be eligible for the loan modification program should visit Countrywide.com or call (800) 669-6650.

read more....

Collin County unemployment rates see increase

February 11, 2009
by Stewart James/Collin County Business Press

For the month of December, Collin County’s unemployment rate increased from 5.3 percent in November to 5.5 percent. The county’s unemployment rate remains below the state and national rate.

Texas’ seasonally adjusted unemployment rate rose to 6 percent in December, while the U.S. unemployment rate climbed to 7.2 percent. Texas’ unemployment rate has consistently remained well below the national rate for the past year. The Texas unemployment rate for December is up from 5.7 percent in November and 4.2 percent a year ago.

“Our state’s economy has been fairly resilient during these months of economic uncertainty, but the national economic storm has reached Texas,” said Tom Pauken, chairman of the Texas Workforce Commission (TWC). “The challenge we face now is to minimize the impact of the national trends by continuing to promote our strong business climate and address the skills needs of Texas employers.”

Texas saw broad industry losses in December. Hardest hit were Trade, Transportation and Utilities and Manufacturing, with losses of 8,100 and 8,000 jobs, respectively. Texas’ over-the-year figures fared better with nine of 11 industries posting positive job growth.

read more (subscription may be required)....

The February edition of "Driving Forward", the NTTA's public newsletter contains an invitation for the public to help name the SH 121 toll road.

According to an article in the Dallas Morning News, Frisco Mayor Maher Maso said that NTTA long ago rejected his suggestion of any name ending with "Freeway".

Here are my suggestions...

Pick yer Pocket Parkway
Eternal Tolls Tollway

Feel free to submit your suggestions here or to the NTTA.

Bill

The US Conference of Mayors has published a "wish list" of "shovel ready" projects that could be financed with federal economic stimulus funding.

Allen, Frisco and McKinney have already submitted their lists to the Mayors' Conference.

Maybe I'm missing the point of the stimulus package. I thought the purpose was to create jobs. Some of the projects these cities have put forward just seem to be way off base and not very stimulating.

Traditional stimulus projects usually involve labor intensive road and infrastructure construction. The kind of "make work" type projects that were done by a few of the depression era programs. To this day we still benefit from many of the WPA and CCC projects built back in the 1930's.

While these cities' lists do include major construction, some have also chosen to list such items as an armored vehicle, a mobile command post and police fingerprint software. (I'm not really sure exactly what the City of Frisco plans to stimulate with an armored vehicle other than the testosterone level of its SWAT team.)

Bloggers Grits for Breakfast and Trey Garrison have highlighted some of the more absurd police requests.

Other "hard to believe it can stimulate" wishes are really ongoing maintenance or operating items - like "ongoing public housing maintenance", and "Realigning Building Lighting".

Other odd wishes appear to be low priority items that got dropped off the budget but might now get a second chance, like "School Resource Officers" or a "Green Coordinator".

The Conference of Mayors' report does not contain an exhaustive list of all Collin County cities, nor does it contain the wish list for the county. But a glimpse at what's been requested so far looks more like the Mayors are lining up at the trough for some good old fashioned pork than trying to stimulate job creation in the region.

Stimulus Watch has a great interactive website listing all the Mayors' requests. It's an eye opener.

Stimulus Watch notes that none of these projects have been approved by the feds, nor are they listed in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act working its way through Congress. That legislation won't list the projects to be funded. Instead, it will appropriate money for federal grant programs, such as the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), which will then use the appropriated stimulus money to make grants to cities. In the case of CDBG, for example, the Department of Housing and Urban Development will be the agency that will decide (using a formula) which of the projects requested by the mayors will be funded.

Bill

The Regional Transportation Council is a committee made up of elected city and county officials in the 9 county DFW planning region. The RTC is the primary planning and funds disbursement organization for all highway, rail and mobility projects that get state or federal funding. It controls literally billions of mobility dollars including the $2 billion gained from the SH 121 toll road contract with NTTA.

On Monday, February 9, the RTC is holding a public meeting at the Christopher Parr Library at 6200 Windhaven Parkway in far west Plano. The meeting will begin at 6:30 P.M.

The RTC "invites the public to learn what is happening with transportation in the region and to help set priorities for the future."

Topics to be presented include:

• Long-term planning Final recommendations for the Mobility 2030 plan.
• Short-term planning detailing the listing of transportation projects planned in the DFW region.
• Air quality conformity for all long and short range projects.
• Status of regional projects scheduled to receive federal economic recovery funds

The Collin County members of the RTC are Collin County Commissioner Joe Jaynes, Plano Councilman Lee Dunlap, NTTA Chairman Paul Wagemen (from Plano), Frisco Mayor Maher Maso and McKinney Mayor Bill Whitfield.

Unfortunately the regional planning group didn't plan for Collin County Days in Austin, to be held on the same day as the public meeting. I know Commissioner Jaynes plans to be in Austin. I don't know if any of our other representatives will be at the public meeting.

These meetings are usually held held by senior and mid-level staff at NCTCOG. I would like to see more of my elected representatives at these public meetings. They are the ones who are accountable to the taxpayers, not their staff.

I do know that I am planning on attending. One question I will ask is why the RTC does not keep a record on how its members voted. For a group that dispenses billions of dollars, it is beyond belief that the citizens can not get the basic information they need to hold their representatives accountable.

I will also be interested in the current efforts to get the $2.6 billion from the SH 121 toll road contract away from TxDOT and back in the region.

Details of the meeting plans can be found on a flyer posted on the North Central Texas Council of Governments website.

Bill

Questions surround Melissa water tower

February 5, 2009
By BYRON HARRIS / WFAA-TV

MELISSA — As mayor of Melissa, a small but growing community in northern Collin County, David Dorman serves without pay.

His record as mayor is studded with accomplishments. He touts the city's "A" bond rating, its highly-rated volunteer fire department, recent donations of property to the city, and the construction of the new Melissa Town Center.

Mayor Dorman supports charities such as CASA and Habitat for Humanity, and says he donates his time to them and the city "because it's the right thing to do."

But as he runs for his sixth term as mayor, Dorman has a list of critics which is growing more vocal.

"He's playing the people; and he's playing the developers," said Janet Hull, who lives on Melissa's border and fears the town's expansion.

Dorman himself is in the real state business, with major land holdings around the city.

One of his companies, DHT Investments, sold the city land for its water tower in 2001. That transaction and others related to it lead some to question his motives.

Dorman is listed as president of DHT with the Texas Secretary of State.

Michael Hudson is DHT's secretary and treasurer. Dorman appointed Hudson as head of Melissa’s Planning and Zoning board.

David Moore is DHT's only director. He is also Melissa's municipal judge, presiding in some code enforcement cases.

Moore also runs a business as a financial planner, and — according to a court deposition — had his business office in Melissa City Hall for a time, which he rented for $1 a year.

The signatures of all three men appear on documents involving the water tower.

In the fall of 2000, the city had yet to choose where the tower would be built. A consultant was hired to investigate possible sites.

In early 2001, documents show DHT bought one of the parcels under consideration for the water tower for $139,000. Then the city chose DHT's property as the site for the tower, and DHT sold the city part of its land at no profit.

"I haven't made any money off the real estate in Melissa at this time," the mayor told News 8 in an interview in December.

But the water tower deal was not yet completed. Contrary to the mayor's recollection, public records indicate that in 2006, DHT sold the remaining water tower property at a profit of $659,000.

The mayor declined to be interviewed on-camera for this story. In a phone conversation, he said he had forgotten about the $659,000 profit when we interviewed him in December, but that he "earned every penny" he made in the transaction.

Municipal Judge David Moore did not return our phone calls.

read article here....

Other WFAA News 8 coverage of Melissa:

9/1/07: Melissa accused of overstating population

12/20/07: Melissa residents oppose further growth

McKinney City Council decides FM543 connector route will skirt trees

Thursday, February 5, 2009
By ELIZABETH LANGTON / The Dallas Morning News

The City Council has sided with the trees in a long-running dispute over the path of a future east-west route through north McKinney.

The FM543 connector will link North Central Expressway and Lake Forest Drive. The council on Tuesday directed staff to align the road so that it avoids as many trees as possible near the Geren Trail neighborhood, prompting applause from dozens of arbor advocates.

Baylor Health Care Systems, which subsequently stands to lose more of its 45 adjacent acres, argued that the city should instead seize equal amounts of land from neighboring properties.

read more....

Study: Changes To US-75 HOV Lanes Dangerous

Jack Fink Reporting
RICHARDSON (CBS 11 News) ―

Thousands of drivers use the Central Expressway HOV lanes every day. There's no telling how many more might use them if there were additional entry and exit points.

But don't expect them in Richardson anytime soon. A new study says it would be too dangerous.

Ask drivers on Central Expressway in Richardson about not being able to gain access to HOV lanes there, and they'll give you an earful.

There's only one access point on the 14-mile stretch of HOV lanes between LBJ and Bethany Drive in Allen, and it's in Plano.

College student Nancy Mathias takes the highway to Dallas everyday. "There were a lot of times I was late and wanted to get into the HOV lanes - we carpool, a lot of students and I - and there was just no way... and so we were stuck behind people," she said.

Another motorist, Ryan Roberts says, "It makes it a little inconvenient just got to sit through traffic and stuff like that."

The Texas Transportation Institute conducted a study to see if they could create entry and exit points to the north and southbound HOV lanes around Collins Avenue.

But researchers found doing so would be dangerous because vehicles travel faster in the HOV lanes than in the main lanes.

So the institute says drivers would have to gun it just to enter an HOV lane safely or quickly slow down to get out of it.

Cortney Berry tries to take the HOV lanes as often as possible, but says, "If it's unsafe, clearly that would create other problems. I don't understand why it has to be here at Collins. I think something could be done to fix it."

But the study says two other areas it considered north of Collins won't work either.

Then there are the thousands of pylons that separate the HOV and main lanes. DART, which will soon give up maintenance of them to TxDOT, says it would be unsafe to remove them.

read more....

--------------------

Comment:
As soon as I see this TTI report on the web, I'll post it here.

Bill

Other CCO coverage:
US-75 HOV: What's next?Aug, 2008
Central HOV jumper causes fatality Aug, 2008

Bill Comments:

In 2001 the Texas legislature allowed for the creation of the Denton County Transit Authority.

Less than 8 years later, construction of a 21 mile rail link from Denton to DART is about to begin, at a cost of only $15 million per mile. Meanwhile buses running a full capacity transport workers from Denton County to Downtown Dallas.

I say "only $15 million" because compared to the US average cost of $35 million per mile for light rail, and the anticipated $75 million per mile (in 2008 dollars) for Collin County's Outer Loop, Denton's A-Train is a real bargain.

Meanwhile, what is Collin County doing? Building toll roads?

Bill

---------------------------------------

Denton County transit agency's rail service coming around the bend

Monday, February 2, 2009
By THEODORE KIM / The Dallas Morning News

Dallas and other cities have long held the transportation spotlight in North Texas. But Denton County has grand ambitions of its own.

Eight years after county leaders first envisioned a multimillion-dollar rail line from Denton into Dallas, the concept is nearing reality.

Stakes and spray paint mark the 21-mile train line's path, which runs not far from Interstate 35E on an old freight route. Details such as where stations will be built and what the sound barriers will look like are just about decided. Construction could start as soon as next month.

And a far-flung slice of the region now reachable only by asphalt will soon become connected to Dallas by rail.

"With this ribbon of transit, we will become more focused on the metropolitan area," Denton Mayor Mark Burroughs said.

Not all have bought into the $314 million project, known as the "A-train" and managed by the fledgling Denton County Transportation Authority.

Some believe the succession of sprawling malls and subdivisions along I-35 is hardly ideal terrain for train service. Others think the line will fail to draw many passengers when it launches in December 2010.

And though local leaders have secured the funding, critics are skeptical of whether the county can pull it off.

"We're way too early for rail," Corinth City Council member Jim Mayfield said. "Rail is the future, but it's way in the future."

Path of the A-train
Still, the vision keeps unfolding.

The diesel line will start in downtown Denton and move south through five stops – one south of Denton, one in Highland Village and two in Lewisville – before ending in Carrollton around Trinity Mills.

Getting from the A-train to DART's future Green Line will take a short walk across the station platform. A typical trip from Denton to downtown Dallas using both lines will take some 70 minutes.

Denton retirees Gary and Cheryl Christopherson said a rail option has become all but a necessity for the fast-growing county – population 600,000 and rising. "This is a good first step," said Gary Christopherson, 68, a retired computer engineer.

Supporters believe the A-train will help curtail air pollution and give commuters a welcome alternative to I-35E, a snarling river of traffic, ramps and merging lanes. The train line is pegged to open just as the interstate is scheduled for a major face-lift.

"The big game plan is getting as many people off the roads as possible," said Dianne Costa, mayor of Highland Village.

The University of North Texas and Texas Woman's University also stand to benefit. Both Denton schools are home to many students and staff whose only option right now is to drive between Dallas and Denton County.

"This project will make it clear that we are part of the vibrant growth of the region," said UNT President Gretchen Bataille.

Quick action
Big-ticket public projects often take decades to build. This endeavor has come at lightning speed.

State lawmakers passed a measure in 2001 allowing Denton to form a local transportation authority. County voters later overwhelmingly supported the idea.

In 2003, Denton, Highland Village and Lewisville approved a half-cent sales tax increase to help pay for the project. That money, plus a $250 million infusion from the State Highway 121 toll road deal, will help cover construction.

read more....

February 9 and 10 are Collin County Days at the Texas Legislature.

Local Chambers of Commerce have for the past several years sponsored events and a trip to Austin for community leaders and citizens during Collin County Days. There are usually several opportunities to meet and network with state leaders and the local legislative delegation. And so it is this year.

Governor Rick Perry will give the keynote address at the opening luncheon.

I am giving some serious thought to attending. I even scheduled vacation time for those 2 days. The $125 registration fee didn't seem overly expensive, since there was a lunch reception included. But then I read the planned schedule of events.

The program includes a series of informal panel discussions. Looking at some of the leaders of those panels I realized that I would be paying $125 to listen to lobbyists' propaganda.

Jeeze, I can get that kind of networking for free listening to Rush Limbaugh on WBAP. Why the heck would I want to pay for these lobbyists to tell me anything?

For example, the healthcare panel is to be led by Arlene Wohlgemuth, Founder and President, Three Point Strategies. I've called Ms. Wohlgemuth the "Pied Piper of Texas", as she played a legislative tune while leading hundreds of thousands of poor children off a cliff.

Ms. Wohlgemuth was a Republican legislator instrumental in the ruinous privatization of Texas's social service system. Her role and the disastrous effects to the poor of that privatization was graphically documented in a recent Dallas Morning News investigative report titled "State of Neglect". Ms. Wohlgemuth's firm, Three Point Strategies lobbies the legislature primarily on behalf of health care companies.

The Taxes and Spending panel is led by Michael Quinn Sullivan, a lobbyist and conservative activist, and former press secretary for Ron Paul. He is described as a devotee of the "Austrian School of Economics", which believes in a radical laissez faire government policy. He is presently the director of Empower Texans, Texans for Fiscal Responsibility and the Empower Texans PAC.

The other two panels are not led by lobbyists, but by State officials.

The Energy Panel is led by Barry Smitherman, the Chairman of the Public Utility Commission. His PUC is largely responsible for the fact that Texans pay some of the highest electricity prices in the nation.

The other panelist is Dub Taylor, the Director of the Comptroller’s State Energy Conservation Office. Mr. Taylor had previously served on the Texas Railroad Commission and now is a leader of the state's efforts towards energy efficiency and sustainability.

The Transportation panel will be chaired by Steven Polunsky, the Committee Director, Texas Senate Committee on Transportation and Homeland Security. Mr. Polunsky is a former policy maker at TxDot and was Director of Research at the now defunct Texas High-Speed Rail Authority. The Texas High Speed Rail and Transportation Corp., an outgrowth of the High Speed Rail Authority gave a presentation to the Commissioners Court last week. The Collin County Commissioners declined to endorse its plans believing them to be too expensive and not cost effective.

There's no balance on the discussion panels. No representatives from Common Cause, from the Center for Public Policy Priorities, Public Citizen or from any group except right-wing lobbyists and state agencies. While some of the speakers, especially Mssrs. Polunsky and Taylor can offer some real technical insight into the issues, only one works at the legislature. This is supposed to be a legislative trip.

Where are our state legislative leaders on these 4 subjects? I'd really like to hear from Dallas's Senator Carona the chair of the Transportation Committee on our $1.2 billion of SH121 funds,. Or from our own Senator Shapiro on the effects of property tax cap bills on education.

Businesses and citizens in Collin County have a real stake in many of the deliberations of the 81st Legislature. They deserve the respect of our state leadership. Instead, it appears my $125 would go largely for attendance at a far right pep rally.

That's too bad.

Bill

It's no secret that former 308th District Court Judge Charles Sandoval was bitterly disappointed when he lost his 2008 GOP primary bid for re-election to Suzanne Wooten.

Courthouse regulars have told me that since his primary loss, Sandoval had tried to convince Governor Perry to appoint him to the new 429th District Court. However the Governor instead appointed Jill Willis as the first judge of the new court.

"I believe this to be a matter of small minds dwelling on a small matter."
Charles Sandoval

Sandoval has also been actively lobbying the other local district judges for appointment as a visiting judge. Visiting or auxiliary judges are ex-judges with at least 8 years experience on the bench who serve as sitting judges in the absence or recusal of a judge. They also serve to help reduce backlogs when a judge is tied up in a long trial.

When a trial judge is recused because of a conflict of interest, it is the Presiding Judge of the local Judicial region who makes the appointment of a visiting judge. Collin County is in the 30+ county 1st Judicial Region - the Administrative Judge is Judge John Ovard of Dallas.

Visiting judge appointments for absence or overload are usually made locally.

Days served as a visiting judge count towards the judges retirement and the position pays about $400/day.

For months the rumors have been floating around that Sandoval and Judge Greg Brewer had been unsuccessfully trying to convince Local Administrative Judge Chris Oldner and the other District Judges to allow Sandoval's name to be placed on the list of possible visiting judges.

In November of 2008, the issue came to a head when Sandoval sent a remarkably petulant letter to the local district judges. The Collin County Observer recently obtained a copy of that letter. It was on county stationary, signed by Sandoval and addressed to "Dear Judges:"

Sandoval starts with, "Where to begin, I have been told by Judge Oldner that I will not be sitting as an auxiliary court judge, so I would like to share a few thoughts with you about the matter.

"First a few weeks ago at a meeting Judge Oldner raised the question of whether I should serve. All agreed there was no problem. The week before last, Judge Oldner sent out an e-mail indicating there was an objection to my serving and the matter would be placed on the next meeting's agenda. It has occurred to me that the other organizations to which I have belonged only require a single vote on matters, but apparently that is not true of us."

Later in his letter, Sandoval mentions that Judge Oldner had talked with Judge Ovard and that "Judge Ovard opined that I could not serve." Sandoval then states that Ovard has "no jurisdiction to decide the matter".

The Sandoval launches into a monologue on the "Dallas rule" where the Dallas District judges had made a policy 2 years ago that judges defeated at the polls would not be appointed as visiting or auxiliary judges. Sandoval calls the Dallas rule a "dumb rule" and he points out that that has never been the policy in Collin County. He mentions Judge Nathan White as an example. (White was defeated in a primary for re-election, but does currently serve as an auxiliary judge).

At one point, in a very self serving way, Sandoval attacks Democratic Party judges, writing, "It sometimes happens that better candidates are defeated by lesser candidates. That certainly happened in Dallas two years ago. To put it differently, if you were given the choice, sight unseen, to have a defeated Republican judge in Dallas try your case, or the victorious Democrat, which one would you choose?"

Then Sandoval comes to the meat of his argument, "Here is the bottom line: Chris Oldner has lined up with Suzanne Wooten and figures his position as LAG [Local Administrative Judge] gives him the power to decide this issue. I say the board of judges can decide and they can make it a majority vote if they wish"... "This is also an opportunity to confront an unsavory alliance which has formed before Suzanne has bee sworn in."

When all the dust had settled, Older prevailed and Sandoval was excluded as an auxiliary judge. Most of the insiders I spoken to say the final decision had little to do with setting a new policy as it had to do with the simple fact that most of the other sitting District Judges simply believe (as the 2007 Bar Poll showed) that Sandoval is a lousy judge, and should not be on the bench. Period.

Is it any wonder that when County Court at Law Administrative Judge John Berry appointed Sandoval as a visiting judge, he was quickly over-ruled and Berry rescinded the appointment?

Bill

Note to the reader:

I wrote this article after receiving credible information that Charles Sandoval had been appointed to serve as a visiting judge by administrative judge John Berry of the Collin County County Court at Law #3.

After publishing it, I received several emails questioning whether, in fact, Sandoval had taken the bench. I immediately pulled the article and started a round of fact checking.

This is what I learned:

Judge Sandoval was appointed a visiting judge by Judge Berry, but that appointment was rescinded at the last moment. Several sources have told me that the appointment was rescinded after a "higher authority" intervened.

Please see my recent post "Sandoval wants a job" for some insight into the maneuvering by Judge Sandoval and the Collin County district judges.

I sincerely regret my error.

Bill

"In Texas the citizens elect their judges." County Judge Keith Self

County Judge Keith Self made that statement when he attempted to give District Judge Chris Oldner a civics lesson two weeks ago. Self was complaining to Oldner over the county's use of visiting judges.

Visiting judges are generally retired district or appellate judges who are hired by a county to conduct hearings and trials. They are generally hired to hear specific cases, or to fill in for a sick or vacationing judge.

All Texas counties use visiting judges for cases where there would be a conflict of interest for the local judges to hear a case. For example, in the case of Collin County vs. Collin County Auditor, since the Auditor is hired by a panel of the county's district judges, and the county sets the judges' budgets, a retired visiting judge from East Texas was brought in to hear the case.

Visiting judges are also used to help speed up the administration of justice when the dockets are overloaded. They serve an important role in helping the courts reduce backlogs.

Their salary, about $400/day are paid by the State of Texas, and the county. Expenses are born by the county. Visiting judges who work only one day a month continue to receive retirement credit for the entire month. In 2002, a Texas State Senate report noted that 25% of Texas' court budget goes to visiting judges.

But while they may once have been elected somewhere in Texas, Self is correct in saying that the citizens did not elect that judge to serve in his present role.

When I think of a visiting judge, I envision a distinguished retired jurist who volunteers to help his community in the best way he can. I think many times, perhaps even most of the time that is exactly what happens.

But what of a judge whom the citizens purposely did not elect? One whom the voters chose not to return to the bench?

When a judge is defeated at the polls, he is still eligible to sit as a visiting judge. Often he does just that. Even though the voters demanded and elected a new judge, the truth is that the old one just might not fade away.

And so we find Judge Charles F. Sandoval sitting as a visiting County Court at Law judge in the Collin County courthouse.

Sandoval was defeated by Judge Suzanne Wooten in the 2008 Republican primary after receiving the lowest bar poll rating of any sitting Collin County judge.

But he's back! And the $64 thousand question is, "Did your vote mean anything? Anything at all?"

Bill