Landowners ask for toll road contract

San Antonio Express-News ^ | September 21, 2006 | Express-News Staff

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

AUSTIN — Requests from about 160 Texas landowners seeking public release of a contract for developing the first phase of Gov. Rick Perry's Trans-Texas Corridor were delivered to the Texas Department of Transportation on Thursday.

The contract between the state and a private consortium led by the Spanish company, Cintra Concesiones de Infraestructuras de Transporte, was signed more than a year ago. The consortium also includes the Zachry Corp. of San Antonio.

Attorney General Greg Abbott has ruled that the contract must be released to the public, but Cintra-Zachry sued to keep parts of the agreement secret. The suit is scheduled to be heard Oct. 10 in state district court in Austin.

The corridor project being developed by Cintra-Zachry would run parallel to Interstate 35 and eventually could stretch from Mexico to Oklahoma.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Trans-Texas Corridor PING!

[cripplecreek]

Cintra-Zachry sued to keep parts of the agreement secret.

Does anyone have any idea what they would want to keep secret?

[Moral Hazard]

"Does anyone have any idea what they would want to keep secret?"

While there are any number of things they might want to keep secret, the obvious possibility is that they want to keep the financial terms confidential for competitive reasons, i.e. they don't want those who have gotten a bad deal from them to know about the terms of those who have gotten a good deal.

It's a pretty standard desire in the marketplace, although I'd be interested to see if there's any evidence that it helps the economy overall (I suspect it does not).

[Diddle E. Squat]

Does anyone have any idea what they would want to keep secret?

Because they are bidding on other tollway projects, and plan to do so as more are proposed. Thus they want to keep some of their concepts, financing strategies, and other specs secret to keep others from copying them and underbidding them. It is very common for business dealings to involve bids with the proprietary data kept secret, though I don't know what the regs are for bidding on public projects. In and of itself that isn't an indicator of anything sinister, though it is possible that there could be something that they would want to hide for political reasons. No way to know right now.

That being said, I'm in favor of full public disclosure at the appropriate time, and wonder if that time has already arrived.

[Ben Ficklin]

Because Cintra doesn't have an actual contract because no one knows for sure what the final arrangement will be.

Cintra is the apparent winner, based on the intitial criteria, but it is possible that when it comes time for the final negotiations, there could be problems and the State would open it up again. If details/trade secrets of Cintra's bid are made public now, the losing bidders would have that info to modify their original bids, if the contract has to be rebid.

The State, like all buyers, is trying to get all the unknowns worked out before signing the final/binding agreement. Anytime a buyer makes changes to a binding contract, the seller gouges.

[E.G.C.]

BTTT

[zeugma]

Does anyone have any idea what they would want to keep secret?

Kickbacks to Gov. Goodhair?

 I suspect strongly that what they really want to hide are non-compete clauses that gives them veto over construction/improvements elsewhere in Texas that might compete with their cash cow.
 

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

bump.

[BobL]

"I suspect strongly that what they really want to hide are non-compete clauses that gives them veto over construction/improvements elsewhere in Texas that might compete with their cash cow."

That's clearly the fear - California cut a deal on private toll lanes on State Highway 91. When the state wanted to upgrade a parallel highway (a very minor upgrade, I may add), the private operator said NO DEAL - and the state was out of luck, due to the non-compete clause. The state later had to buy the road, so that they could make the improvements. Even Tom McClintock, the only true conservative who runs for state office there, admits that he was tricked and that he would never support such a scam again. Too bad the Texas governor (and some people on this site) don't have standards as high, and are not willing to learn from their mistakes.

Also, they found in Canada, when a court (after 4 years) did release the contract, that Ontario had virtually ZERO power to regulate tolls on a Cintra highway up there, even though the politicians had constantly said otherwise. Over, done, Ontario lost. Does anyone here really think that Governor Perry has enough savy to defeat Cintra in negotiations - particularly when his chief negotiator was a Cintra lobbyist (i.e., this makes New Jersey look clean).

The other thing I'd be interested in finding out is who gets a toll-free ride. I'm sure it's in the contract, and if it involves anyone who had authority to authorize and negotiate the contract, there is clearly ANOTHER conflict of interest. For this one, I have no precedent elsewhere, so the contract may well be fine - but we cannot see the contract.

It is in both Cintra's and especially the Governor's interest to keep the contract secret (as it would easily sink Perry's re-election chances if it came out). This other stuff about future bidding is a smokescreen. If the governor had the interests of TEXANS in mind, he would have told Cintra to go to hell when they asked to keep the contract secret. We just don't operate that way in a (what was) a free country.

[zeugma]

Thanks for your reply Bob. This whole tollway thing is a complete scam. I hate tollways with a passion, but I can at least stomach them if they are state roads. At least that way we could hold out some hope of someone honest getting into office once they were paid off, and untolled. With this deal, that just won't happen. Houston was smart to say thanks but no thanks when offered to sell the Beltway.

[zeugma]

Have you noticed the usual pro-toll suspects haven't had anything to say about this thread? I think it's a first.

[no dems]

VOTE KINKY FRIEDMAN!!! What other choice do we have? Huh? Somebody tell me; what other choice do we have?

[BobL]

"Have you noticed the usual pro-toll suspects haven't had anything to say about this thread? I think it's a first."

You're welcome.

I don't know if I'd call them "suspects", but I do recognize some names this thread.

Also, I'm suspect about the line regarding that the final contract has not been "sign". Just about every article that I read says that it has been signed and that Cintra has been selected to build the road. I don't know, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's a new tactic meant to put people at ease, at least through the November election.

[Hydroshock]

Kinky has my vote.

[Hydroshock]

The time for full public disclosure is past due.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

You're welcome.