Keith Self's Blog
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson
Let us learn together that we may continue to be free.
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Report on Commissioners Court, August 28
Citizens,
1) During the Commissioners Court session this morning, the court had the first serious discussion of a tax rate cut this year. I was delighted that the court actually considered the issue of reducing the county property taxes that you owe this coming year. In fact, there was an extensive discussion between the relative merits of a tax rate cut versus a homestead exemption. The court reached no conclusions, but asked the budget officer to develop the projections for each option; a tax rate cut or a homestead exemption. Of course, the other side of the coin - spending cuts where possible - should be addressed in conjunction with a decrease in your tax bill.
You have another opportunity to attend and participate in the last public hearing that we will hold on the budget, scheduled for 7 PM, Tuesday, September 4, at the new County Courthouse, 2100 Bloomdale Rd, McKinney 75071. This is a chance to take a look around the new courthouse in conjunction with the public hearing.
2. I also presented a briefing to the court on my vision for future transportation funding by the county. You have already read my vision below, dated August 20. The bottom line to my briefing was that federal and state funding are decreasing and we do not have the funds available to fully fund the major projects identified by the Pass Through Financing program or the projects nominated for funding by the concession fee expected from the SH 121 NTTA contract. Since the Pass Through Financing program is a reimbursement program from the state, it is best use of county dollars to fund those projects.
During the briefing, I recommended that the total amount of the bond proposal be decreased to $271 million, the amount that the county can bond and keep our debt payment under 5 1/2 cents (out of your 24 1/2 cent property tax rate.)
I also recommended that we change the bond proposal to use the county bond funds to pay for the major projects that will reduce congestion on our major highways and will be reimbursed by the state.
The county needs to take more responsibility for the extreme congestion that you experience every day. Does the county have the funds to completely eliminate congestion? Of course not, but we need to start influencing the schedule of our own major highways, while continuing to work with our state and federal elected officials to find additional highway funding.
3. A disappointment this morning was a perception that the court as a whole abandoned the 5 1/2 cent target figure, used since 1999, to pay down debt. Although the figure has apparently not been an official figure, it has been the target for almost a decade. I believe that every organization, and every family for that matter, should have a firm idea of what should be spent on debt. 5 1/2 cents represents approximately 22.5%, which is a reasonable debt service level.
4. I continue to wrestle with my response to the current bond proposal that we will vote on this November. I believe that the proposal perpetuates the "Cycle of Congestion" - see the blog entry on August 9. I believe that the proposal represents a self-imposed moratorium on addressing congestion until the year 2015. I believe that it is important to get started NOW to address the largest frustration to our citizens - the congestion on our major highways. THIS IS A NEW WAY OF DOING BUSINESS. I freely admit that, but the old way of doing business has not kept pace with the rapid growth of Collin County. The federal and state highway funding environment is getting worse - let's start to be more proactive, more aggressive in addressing our growing congestion. This is not the time to wilt in the heat of challenge. Now is the time to spend your county tax dollars on county transportation issues.
Standing with you, the taxpayer,
Keith
1) During the Commissioners Court session this morning, the court had the first serious discussion of a tax rate cut this year. I was delighted that the court actually considered the issue of reducing the county property taxes that you owe this coming year. In fact, there was an extensive discussion between the relative merits of a tax rate cut versus a homestead exemption. The court reached no conclusions, but asked the budget officer to develop the projections for each option; a tax rate cut or a homestead exemption. Of course, the other side of the coin - spending cuts where possible - should be addressed in conjunction with a decrease in your tax bill.
You have another opportunity to attend and participate in the last public hearing that we will hold on the budget, scheduled for 7 PM, Tuesday, September 4, at the new County Courthouse, 2100 Bloomdale Rd, McKinney 75071. This is a chance to take a look around the new courthouse in conjunction with the public hearing.
2. I also presented a briefing to the court on my vision for future transportation funding by the county. You have already read my vision below, dated August 20. The bottom line to my briefing was that federal and state funding are decreasing and we do not have the funds available to fully fund the major projects identified by the Pass Through Financing program or the projects nominated for funding by the concession fee expected from the SH 121 NTTA contract. Since the Pass Through Financing program is a reimbursement program from the state, it is best use of county dollars to fund those projects.
During the briefing, I recommended that the total amount of the bond proposal be decreased to $271 million, the amount that the county can bond and keep our debt payment under 5 1/2 cents (out of your 24 1/2 cent property tax rate.)
I also recommended that we change the bond proposal to use the county bond funds to pay for the major projects that will reduce congestion on our major highways and will be reimbursed by the state.
The county needs to take more responsibility for the extreme congestion that you experience every day. Does the county have the funds to completely eliminate congestion? Of course not, but we need to start influencing the schedule of our own major highways, while continuing to work with our state and federal elected officials to find additional highway funding.
3. A disappointment this morning was a perception that the court as a whole abandoned the 5 1/2 cent target figure, used since 1999, to pay down debt. Although the figure has apparently not been an official figure, it has been the target for almost a decade. I believe that every organization, and every family for that matter, should have a firm idea of what should be spent on debt. 5 1/2 cents represents approximately 22.5%, which is a reasonable debt service level.
4. I continue to wrestle with my response to the current bond proposal that we will vote on this November. I believe that the proposal perpetuates the "Cycle of Congestion" - see the blog entry on August 9. I believe that the proposal represents a self-imposed moratorium on addressing congestion until the year 2015. I believe that it is important to get started NOW to address the largest frustration to our citizens - the congestion on our major highways. THIS IS A NEW WAY OF DOING BUSINESS. I freely admit that, but the old way of doing business has not kept pace with the rapid growth of Collin County. The federal and state highway funding environment is getting worse - let's start to be more proactive, more aggressive in addressing our growing congestion. This is not the time to wilt in the heat of challenge. Now is the time to spend your county tax dollars on county transportation issues.
Standing with you, the taxpayer,
Keith
posted by Keith Self # 2:33 PM
Saturday, August 25, 2007
August 28 Public Hearing on Tax Increase
Concerned citizens, the first of two public hearings on the proposed tax increase is Tuesday, August 28, at 9 AM in the Commissioners Courtroom. There is plenty of parking since the District Courts moved to the new courthouse, so please join us at the 210 S McDonald St courthouse for this public hearing. The public hearing is during the General Discussion portion of our regular court session.
I was the single "No" vote on the proposed tax rate, a rate that leads to the proposed tax increase that passed 4-1.
The tax increase raises the total tax dollars raised by 4.22%. This may or may not be your tax increase, but is the percentage increase in total dollars collected. Your individual tax levy may increase if your property appraisal increased.
Tax revenues change for three reasons:
1) New property that is built and included on the tax roll.
2) Appraisals on existing property that reflect increased value.
3) Tax rate changes. This is the element that the Commissioners Court controls that determines whether or not you have a tax increase.
The final vote on the budget and the tax rate will be on September 11 after the two public hearings on August 28 and September 4. You may view the official public notice on the tax increase at http://public1.co.collin.tx.us/public_notices/Lists/Public%20Meetings/Attachments/365/FY08publicnotice1.pdf
I believe that the court could have cut more spending from the proposed budget. Even in light of our lack of commitment to cut more fat from the budget, the large surpluses that have built up over the years suggest that we could cut the tax rate this year as we slowly lower the surpluses to a more reasonable level.
Right now, the county has 270 days operating budget in surplus. Our bonding agencies tell us that we need on the order of 120 days to maintain our stellar AAA bond rating. The court committed some of the surpluses to known future capital expenditures, such as the Permanent Improvement Fund and the construction of the Administration Building, which will reduce the surpluses over time.
I agree with attempting to self-fund major projects in the future without bond elections, but I also support a tax rate cut which would return some of the surplus to you, the taxpayer.
Please note the increase in debt service by almost 18%. And this is BEFORE another bond proposal that will be voted on in November, a vote that could raise the debt payment past the target amount until the year 2015!
This increase in debt payment is one of the most troubling aspects of this budget and bond proposal. Excessive debt that is justified by the apparently never-ending times of prosperity and economic growth is not wise, either for families who take on too much credit card debt or for governments who accept excessive public debt.
Unlike the federal government, our county is not allowed to run a deficit. If debt continues to grow, it means that services to you, the taxpayer, must suffer in order to pay down our debt.
Sincerely,
Keith
I was the single "No" vote on the proposed tax rate, a rate that leads to the proposed tax increase that passed 4-1.
The tax increase raises the total tax dollars raised by 4.22%. This may or may not be your tax increase, but is the percentage increase in total dollars collected. Your individual tax levy may increase if your property appraisal increased.
Tax revenues change for three reasons:
1) New property that is built and included on the tax roll.
2) Appraisals on existing property that reflect increased value.
3) Tax rate changes. This is the element that the Commissioners Court controls that determines whether or not you have a tax increase.
The final vote on the budget and the tax rate will be on September 11 after the two public hearings on August 28 and September 4. You may view the official public notice on the tax increase at http://public1.co.collin.tx.us/public_notices/Lists/Public%20Meetings/Attachments/365/FY08publicnotice1.pdf
I believe that the court could have cut more spending from the proposed budget. Even in light of our lack of commitment to cut more fat from the budget, the large surpluses that have built up over the years suggest that we could cut the tax rate this year as we slowly lower the surpluses to a more reasonable level.
Right now, the county has 270 days operating budget in surplus. Our bonding agencies tell us that we need on the order of 120 days to maintain our stellar AAA bond rating. The court committed some of the surpluses to known future capital expenditures, such as the Permanent Improvement Fund and the construction of the Administration Building, which will reduce the surpluses over time.
I agree with attempting to self-fund major projects in the future without bond elections, but I also support a tax rate cut which would return some of the surplus to you, the taxpayer.
Please note the increase in debt service by almost 18%. And this is BEFORE another bond proposal that will be voted on in November, a vote that could raise the debt payment past the target amount until the year 2015!
This increase in debt payment is one of the most troubling aspects of this budget and bond proposal. Excessive debt that is justified by the apparently never-ending times of prosperity and economic growth is not wise, either for families who take on too much credit card debt or for governments who accept excessive public debt.
Unlike the federal government, our county is not allowed to run a deficit. If debt continues to grow, it means that services to you, the taxpayer, must suffer in order to pay down our debt.
Sincerely,
Keith
posted by Keith Self # 8:00 AM
Monday, August 20, 2007
A Positive Vision for County Transportation Funding
Citizens, I want to lay out a positive vision for how the county ought to approach its responsibility to provide the transportation network in Collin County.
The vision has three concrete elements:
1) Re-examine the Pass Through Financing proposal that we submitted to the state in April. We have not identified approximately $160 million in local funding that is required to construct five of the individual projects in order to receive state reimbursement. If these five projects are not important enough to commit county taxpayer funds, then let's withdraw them from the proposal in order to give the remaining projects a better chance of approval. But, if they are as important as first determined, then let's commit the required county taxpayer funds to construct all the projects, receive the reimbursement, and then use the reimbursed funds to build other transportation projects.
2) Determine the amount of debt that the county can afford under the long-standing policy of 5 1/2 cents in debt service funding. Do not ask our taxpayers to approve a total bond package that requires debt payment more than 5 1/2 cents from the total tax rate of 24 1/2 cents. In the absence of emergency conditions such as a disaster, we should not incur excessive debt.
3) Once the first two points are decided, develop a policy to determine the strategic points where county taxpayer funds will significantly accelerate the design, approval and construction of our major highways and most importantly, lessen the congestion on those major highways. County funding can be targeted at the early requirements of major highway construction projects, such as environmental studies, engineering and design, right of way acquisition, and yes, perhaps even a portion of selected construction. This approach may not be as dramatic or visible as more immediate projects on feeder roads, but it will make real progress relieving congestion faster on our major highways.
I want to give a real example to illustrate the vision, using a project that will soon be necessary, but does not yet carry the emotional baggage of some other projects in the county. A very complex, multi-level intersection will be required, and soon, where SH 289 (Preston Road) and Dallas North Tollway cross US 380 within a short distance of each other. This is not a minor intersection - it will require tens of millions of dollars, perhaps over $100 million. This example has many elements to it - it is on the boundary between two cities; it requires cooperation with two major transportation partners, NTTA and TxDot; and it includes a tollway, a State Highway, and a US Highway. Aggressive inter-agency coordination and contribution toward funding environmental studies, engineering and design, and right of way acquisition would accelerate this project. This is an example of where and how the county could play a more proactive role in our responsibilities. Not only are there current circumstances like this one where county participation could be vital, but as our county grows, other similar circumstances will occur.
I am looking for those who are willing to consider a new way to address a challenge that grows worse every day - the congestion on our major highways. I am looking for citizens and elected officials who are willing to work together to develop a program to spend our county taxpayers' hard earned money on core county functions, in this case, county transportation responsibilities.
If you are happy with your commute and the traffic on our major roads, then the current way of doing business is sufficient for you. If, on the other hand, you want to see change; if you want to see the county develop a program to address our congestion, I encourage you to seriously consider this vision.
This vision:
1) Is an alternative to the bond proposal that will be on the ballot in November. A short delay to determine the appropriate spending of county taxpayer funds on county responsibilities is preferable to the 5 to 8-year delay that does not address our congestion while we make payments on the excessive debt required for the bond proposal.
2) Is not the current county policy, but is a starting point for discussion on how the county government should discharge its responsibilities in a county that ranges from mature cities to smaller, growing cities to a large portion of unincorporated area.
3) Is offered in an environment of declining federal and state highway funding; an environment in which the county, as the lowest level of state government, may be asked to provide a larger percentage of transportation funding.
4) And most importantly, addresses the congestion on our major highways, one of the most important issues to a large number of Collin County citizens.
Sincerely,
Keith
The vision has three concrete elements:
1) Re-examine the Pass Through Financing proposal that we submitted to the state in April. We have not identified approximately $160 million in local funding that is required to construct five of the individual projects in order to receive state reimbursement. If these five projects are not important enough to commit county taxpayer funds, then let's withdraw them from the proposal in order to give the remaining projects a better chance of approval. But, if they are as important as first determined, then let's commit the required county taxpayer funds to construct all the projects, receive the reimbursement, and then use the reimbursed funds to build other transportation projects.
2) Determine the amount of debt that the county can afford under the long-standing policy of 5 1/2 cents in debt service funding. Do not ask our taxpayers to approve a total bond package that requires debt payment more than 5 1/2 cents from the total tax rate of 24 1/2 cents. In the absence of emergency conditions such as a disaster, we should not incur excessive debt.
3) Once the first two points are decided, develop a policy to determine the strategic points where county taxpayer funds will significantly accelerate the design, approval and construction of our major highways and most importantly, lessen the congestion on those major highways. County funding can be targeted at the early requirements of major highway construction projects, such as environmental studies, engineering and design, right of way acquisition, and yes, perhaps even a portion of selected construction. This approach may not be as dramatic or visible as more immediate projects on feeder roads, but it will make real progress relieving congestion faster on our major highways.
I want to give a real example to illustrate the vision, using a project that will soon be necessary, but does not yet carry the emotional baggage of some other projects in the county. A very complex, multi-level intersection will be required, and soon, where SH 289 (Preston Road) and Dallas North Tollway cross US 380 within a short distance of each other. This is not a minor intersection - it will require tens of millions of dollars, perhaps over $100 million. This example has many elements to it - it is on the boundary between two cities; it requires cooperation with two major transportation partners, NTTA and TxDot; and it includes a tollway, a State Highway, and a US Highway. Aggressive inter-agency coordination and contribution toward funding environmental studies, engineering and design, and right of way acquisition would accelerate this project. This is an example of where and how the county could play a more proactive role in our responsibilities. Not only are there current circumstances like this one where county participation could be vital, but as our county grows, other similar circumstances will occur.
I am looking for those who are willing to consider a new way to address a challenge that grows worse every day - the congestion on our major highways. I am looking for citizens and elected officials who are willing to work together to develop a program to spend our county taxpayers' hard earned money on core county functions, in this case, county transportation responsibilities.
If you are happy with your commute and the traffic on our major roads, then the current way of doing business is sufficient for you. If, on the other hand, you want to see change; if you want to see the county develop a program to address our congestion, I encourage you to seriously consider this vision.
This vision:
1) Is an alternative to the bond proposal that will be on the ballot in November. A short delay to determine the appropriate spending of county taxpayer funds on county responsibilities is preferable to the 5 to 8-year delay that does not address our congestion while we make payments on the excessive debt required for the bond proposal.
2) Is not the current county policy, but is a starting point for discussion on how the county government should discharge its responsibilities in a county that ranges from mature cities to smaller, growing cities to a large portion of unincorporated area.
3) Is offered in an environment of declining federal and state highway funding; an environment in which the county, as the lowest level of state government, may be asked to provide a larger percentage of transportation funding.
4) And most importantly, addresses the congestion on our major highways, one of the most important issues to a large number of Collin County citizens.
Sincerely,
Keith
posted by Keith Self # 5:09 AM
Thursday, August 16, 2007
Consolidated List of Concerns on Transportation Bond Proposal
Citizens,
You have very patiently read my past blog entries that discussed only one or two issues with the bond proposal in each blog entry. It is time for a comprehensive, but short list of the issues in a single blog so that you can understand my very real concerns with both the focus of the proposal and the debt you incur with the proposal.
1) Does not address the congestion on our major highways. Always the #1 issue is the failure of the bond proposal to address the extreme congestion on our major highways. With the continuing decrease in federal and state transportation funding, it is imperative that we participate in addressing the congestion that you experience every day.
2) Assumes excessive debt. The amount of debt service (debt payment) required by the total amount of this bond is above the target amount of 5 1/2 cents out of your 24 1/2 cent county tax rate, and that debt payment stays above 5 1/2 cents until the year 2015. There are two ways to make these payments; a) decrease services to you, the taxpayer, or b) increase your taxes. The 2008 proposed budget reduces services to you because it takes funds out of the operations budget to pay debt. This is like taking money out of your food budget to pay credit card debt. We will hold hearings on this budget and vote on it on September 11. Denton County, on the other hand, is raising their tax rate this year to pay their debt on a 2004 bond. Neither is a good option. See the discussion on the current economic conditions at the end of this blog for the potential long term implications of this excessive debt.
3) Does not provide benefits to all county citizens. The taxpayers in nine cities in Collin County will pay their county taxes, but will receive no benefit from this bond proposal.
4) Forfeits $160 million in state transportation funding. This bond proposal forfeits $160 million in state reimbursement under the Pass Through Financing Program, which TxDot tells us they are favorably considering. The reimbursement is offered only if we build the road projects first, yet we have not identified the $160 million to build five of the projects for which we requested reimbursement. I assure you, the county does not have an extra $160 million lying around.
5) Does not identify and discharge the county responsibility for transportation infrastructure. This is the large policy issue that needs development. What is the county responsibility? Is it to pass taxes collected from you to other taxing entities? Is that the sum total of the county responsibility?
While it is still developing, we should also be very cautious because of the current state of the housing market and a possible downturn in the general economy. The housing market downturn could be short, but our property tax is totally dependent on the value of our real property. If the downturn is deep and long, that debt service we discussed above could be really painful because once incurred, it does not go away. We are all now used to the continued increase of our real property values, but it may not always increase, and in light of the current economic developments, we need to be watchful.
I hope this gives you a complete picture of my concerns.
Standing with you, the taxpayer,
Keith
You have very patiently read my past blog entries that discussed only one or two issues with the bond proposal in each blog entry. It is time for a comprehensive, but short list of the issues in a single blog so that you can understand my very real concerns with both the focus of the proposal and the debt you incur with the proposal.
1) Does not address the congestion on our major highways. Always the #1 issue is the failure of the bond proposal to address the extreme congestion on our major highways. With the continuing decrease in federal and state transportation funding, it is imperative that we participate in addressing the congestion that you experience every day.
2) Assumes excessive debt. The amount of debt service (debt payment) required by the total amount of this bond is above the target amount of 5 1/2 cents out of your 24 1/2 cent county tax rate, and that debt payment stays above 5 1/2 cents until the year 2015. There are two ways to make these payments; a) decrease services to you, the taxpayer, or b) increase your taxes. The 2008 proposed budget reduces services to you because it takes funds out of the operations budget to pay debt. This is like taking money out of your food budget to pay credit card debt. We will hold hearings on this budget and vote on it on September 11. Denton County, on the other hand, is raising their tax rate this year to pay their debt on a 2004 bond. Neither is a good option. See the discussion on the current economic conditions at the end of this blog for the potential long term implications of this excessive debt.
3) Does not provide benefits to all county citizens. The taxpayers in nine cities in Collin County will pay their county taxes, but will receive no benefit from this bond proposal.
4) Forfeits $160 million in state transportation funding. This bond proposal forfeits $160 million in state reimbursement under the Pass Through Financing Program, which TxDot tells us they are favorably considering. The reimbursement is offered only if we build the road projects first, yet we have not identified the $160 million to build five of the projects for which we requested reimbursement. I assure you, the county does not have an extra $160 million lying around.
5) Does not identify and discharge the county responsibility for transportation infrastructure. This is the large policy issue that needs development. What is the county responsibility? Is it to pass taxes collected from you to other taxing entities? Is that the sum total of the county responsibility?
While it is still developing, we should also be very cautious because of the current state of the housing market and a possible downturn in the general economy. The housing market downturn could be short, but our property tax is totally dependent on the value of our real property. If the downturn is deep and long, that debt service we discussed above could be really painful because once incurred, it does not go away. We are all now used to the continued increase of our real property values, but it may not always increase, and in light of the current economic developments, we need to be watchful.
I hope this gives you a complete picture of my concerns.
Standing with you, the taxpayer,
Keith
posted by Keith Self # 12:17 PM
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Bond Proposal and Initial Tax Rate Votes
Citizens,
I voted against the bond package today, as I previously stated I would. All elements of the package passed 4-1.
The transportation bond proposal does not address the #1 issue among Collin County citizens - congestion on our major highways. You will hear many reasons why this bond election should not address the congestion on our major highways, but I believe that addressing congestion on major highways is the correct use of the county taxes that you pay. $235 million will go a long way to influencing our congestion through strategic spending on timely environmental studies, engineering and design, targeted acquisition of right of way, and yes, even contributing to construction costs. It is widely known that state and federal highway funds are decreasing, which makes our participation even more imperative.
Although there are three separate proposals (transportation, facilities, and open space) I believe that this is a consolidated bond election, so I voted against all three separate elements as a consolidated whole. I believe that the Facilities Committee did an outstanding job addressing the county needs with their recommendations, but the co-chairs of that committee assured the court that a one-year delay would not impact their recommendations.
During court today, I discussed the fact that if this transportation bond proposal passes, we will forfeit $160 million in state reimbursement under the Pass Through Financing proposal that we submitted to TxDot in April. We requested a total of approximately $360 million in reimbursement for projects that the entire county certified as so important that TxDot would agree to reimburse a major portion of our construction costs. But we have not identified $160 million from any funding source in order to build these roads before we are eligible to receive reimbursement! How can we forfeit $160 million that we could then turn around and use on other projects? $160 million is not pocket change for Collin County. We will lose this opportunity to address congestion on major roads. By the way, the argument that the county should not spend funds on state and federal highways is contradicted by the Pass Through Financing proposal because seven of those county-certified projects were either state or federal highways.
I also discussed the fact that if this transportation bond proposal passes, nine cities in Collin County will receive NO benefit from the bond. These are the small cities whose citizens will pay county taxes to repay the bond loan, but will receive NO benefit. This is always the issue when a government moves to a liberal wealth distribution model - they have to take hard-earned money from some in order to give to others. The county government has no funds other than what they collect from you, the taxpayer. This is why it is important that government focus on core government functions that benefit all citizens.
The bottom line on this entire bond proposal is that if it passes, I predict that the next outcry will be to raise taxes in order to address the congestion on our major highways. Remember, the #1 issue among Collin County citizens is the congestion on our major highways. Do not be lured into a short term fix that does not address the long range problem of congestion.
By the way, I also voted against the initial property tax rate, 24 and 1/2 cents per $100 in value. Our tax base increased by 10.9% this year, yet no serious consideration was given for a tax rate decrease. This is a stealth tax increase for you, the taxpayer. This is not the final tax rate - we have two public hearings scheduled on the tax rate and will take a final vote on the tax rate on September 11.
A statement that I repeated several times today in conversations with the media is, "I will continue to stand with the taxpayers of Collin County."
Standing with you,
Keith
I voted against the bond package today, as I previously stated I would. All elements of the package passed 4-1.
The transportation bond proposal does not address the #1 issue among Collin County citizens - congestion on our major highways. You will hear many reasons why this bond election should not address the congestion on our major highways, but I believe that addressing congestion on major highways is the correct use of the county taxes that you pay. $235 million will go a long way to influencing our congestion through strategic spending on timely environmental studies, engineering and design, targeted acquisition of right of way, and yes, even contributing to construction costs. It is widely known that state and federal highway funds are decreasing, which makes our participation even more imperative.
Although there are three separate proposals (transportation, facilities, and open space) I believe that this is a consolidated bond election, so I voted against all three separate elements as a consolidated whole. I believe that the Facilities Committee did an outstanding job addressing the county needs with their recommendations, but the co-chairs of that committee assured the court that a one-year delay would not impact their recommendations.
During court today, I discussed the fact that if this transportation bond proposal passes, we will forfeit $160 million in state reimbursement under the Pass Through Financing proposal that we submitted to TxDot in April. We requested a total of approximately $360 million in reimbursement for projects that the entire county certified as so important that TxDot would agree to reimburse a major portion of our construction costs. But we have not identified $160 million from any funding source in order to build these roads before we are eligible to receive reimbursement! How can we forfeit $160 million that we could then turn around and use on other projects? $160 million is not pocket change for Collin County. We will lose this opportunity to address congestion on major roads. By the way, the argument that the county should not spend funds on state and federal highways is contradicted by the Pass Through Financing proposal because seven of those county-certified projects were either state or federal highways.
I also discussed the fact that if this transportation bond proposal passes, nine cities in Collin County will receive NO benefit from the bond. These are the small cities whose citizens will pay county taxes to repay the bond loan, but will receive NO benefit. This is always the issue when a government moves to a liberal wealth distribution model - they have to take hard-earned money from some in order to give to others. The county government has no funds other than what they collect from you, the taxpayer. This is why it is important that government focus on core government functions that benefit all citizens.
The bottom line on this entire bond proposal is that if it passes, I predict that the next outcry will be to raise taxes in order to address the congestion on our major highways. Remember, the #1 issue among Collin County citizens is the congestion on our major highways. Do not be lured into a short term fix that does not address the long range problem of congestion.
By the way, I also voted against the initial property tax rate, 24 and 1/2 cents per $100 in value. Our tax base increased by 10.9% this year, yet no serious consideration was given for a tax rate decrease. This is a stealth tax increase for you, the taxpayer. This is not the final tax rate - we have two public hearings scheduled on the tax rate and will take a final vote on the tax rate on September 11.
A statement that I repeated several times today in conversations with the media is, "I will continue to stand with the taxpayers of Collin County."
Standing with you,
Keith
posted by Keith Self # 7:17 PM
Thursday, August 09, 2007
Forever Free Celebration on Saturday and the "Cycle of Guaranteed Congestion"
Citizens, I greatly appreciate you hanging in with me as we go through this intense time of budget and bond discussions. Thank you, and I assure you that after September 11, the day we vote on the county budget, the number of blog postings and emails will decrease.
1) Forever Free.
Please join me for Forever Free at Myers Park this Saturday evening at 5:30 PM, August 11. Forever Free is a military celebration of American heroes, complete with fireworks, military flyovers and displays, real armed forces heroes, celebrity guests, and so much more. You may view the county web site poster at http://www.collincountytx.gov/public_information/features/forever_free.jsp
The celebration will include recognition of wounded veterans; several flyovers, including the Navy F/A-18 Super Hornet; a re-enactment of the Iwo Jima flag raising; and of course, fireworks. I will be helping to kick it off at 5:30, but come see the real show - our magnificent Armed Forces and the great Americans who serve us.
If you want to greet the soldiers as they arrive from Ft Hood, please be at the Collin County Regional Airport in McKinney at 2:30 PM.
2) The Cycle of Guaranteed Congestion.
The need to address the congestion on our major highways was driven home to me this week at the Transportation Summit in Irving. I participated in a panel of county judges as we discussed transportation challenges in our respective counties. I also heard several presentations that emphasized the need for every level to address the extreme congestion that will literally overwhelm us if we do not get started. This is not just a Collin County issue, I heard very similar issues from as far away as Arizona, which has exactly our growth pattern.
Even as we continue the discussion of transportation financing, I become more convinced that we can find a better way to collectively fund our roads and to work together to find additional state and federal funding for the roads we need. Our growth is a wonderful problem to have because it brings more businesses and new construction to help us shoulder together the construction of our necessary infrastructure.
I want to describe what I call, "The Cycle of Guaranteed Congestion."
1) No county tax dollars are dedicated to hasten major highway construction through strategic funding of environmental studies, engineering, right of way acquisition, or contributing to construction costs.
2) #1 leads to continued congestion on major highways.
3) #2 leads to our citizens traveling on feeder streets instead of enduring massive delays on major highways.
4) #3 leads to congestion on feeder streets.
5) #4 leads to more rapid deterioration of feeder streets and creates the need for more feeder streets.
6) #5 leads to the need to target tax dollars to rebuilding feeder roads or constructing new feeder roads in order to attempt to alleviate feeder congestion, rather than focusing on the original problem - congestion on the major highways.
7) #6 leads back to #1. And the cycle continues.
You can enter the cycle at any point. If I drew this cycle on a whiteboard, it would be circular with no starting point and no ending point.
Where do we break out of this cycle of guaranteed congestion?
Is this cycle a perfect picture of congestion? Of course not. I offer this as a description of what I see happening. I offer it as a starting point because I believe that we must give our citizens access to less congested major highways across Collin County before we can ever hope to relieve the congestion on our feeder streets. Our citizens WILL continue to drive, and they WILL continue to find the best route, even if that best route is along feeder streets which are not designed for extreme traffic counts.
Sincerely, and I hope to see you Saturday at Myers Park,
Keith
1) Forever Free.
Please join me for Forever Free at Myers Park this Saturday evening at 5:30 PM, August 11. Forever Free is a military celebration of American heroes, complete with fireworks, military flyovers and displays, real armed forces heroes, celebrity guests, and so much more. You may view the county web site poster at http://www.collincountytx.gov/public_information/features/forever_free.jsp
The celebration will include recognition of wounded veterans; several flyovers, including the Navy F/A-18 Super Hornet; a re-enactment of the Iwo Jima flag raising; and of course, fireworks. I will be helping to kick it off at 5:30, but come see the real show - our magnificent Armed Forces and the great Americans who serve us.
If you want to greet the soldiers as they arrive from Ft Hood, please be at the Collin County Regional Airport in McKinney at 2:30 PM.
2) The Cycle of Guaranteed Congestion.
The need to address the congestion on our major highways was driven home to me this week at the Transportation Summit in Irving. I participated in a panel of county judges as we discussed transportation challenges in our respective counties. I also heard several presentations that emphasized the need for every level to address the extreme congestion that will literally overwhelm us if we do not get started. This is not just a Collin County issue, I heard very similar issues from as far away as Arizona, which has exactly our growth pattern.
Even as we continue the discussion of transportation financing, I become more convinced that we can find a better way to collectively fund our roads and to work together to find additional state and federal funding for the roads we need. Our growth is a wonderful problem to have because it brings more businesses and new construction to help us shoulder together the construction of our necessary infrastructure.
I want to describe what I call, "The Cycle of Guaranteed Congestion."
1) No county tax dollars are dedicated to hasten major highway construction through strategic funding of environmental studies, engineering, right of way acquisition, or contributing to construction costs.
2) #1 leads to continued congestion on major highways.
3) #2 leads to our citizens traveling on feeder streets instead of enduring massive delays on major highways.
4) #3 leads to congestion on feeder streets.
5) #4 leads to more rapid deterioration of feeder streets and creates the need for more feeder streets.
6) #5 leads to the need to target tax dollars to rebuilding feeder roads or constructing new feeder roads in order to attempt to alleviate feeder congestion, rather than focusing on the original problem - congestion on the major highways.
7) #6 leads back to #1. And the cycle continues.
You can enter the cycle at any point. If I drew this cycle on a whiteboard, it would be circular with no starting point and no ending point.
Where do we break out of this cycle of guaranteed congestion?
Is this cycle a perfect picture of congestion? Of course not. I offer this as a description of what I see happening. I offer it as a starting point because I believe that we must give our citizens access to less congested major highways across Collin County before we can ever hope to relieve the congestion on our feeder streets. Our citizens WILL continue to drive, and they WILL continue to find the best route, even if that best route is along feeder streets which are not designed for extreme traffic counts.
Sincerely, and I hope to see you Saturday at Myers Park,
Keith
posted by Keith Self # 2:39 PM
Tuesday, August 07, 2007
More on Budget and Bond Election Discussions
Discussions on budget and bond elections continue. The Commissioners Court held a workshop yesterday, Monday, August 6. Most of the discussions during the workshop dealt with the bond committees' recommendations concerning a prospective bond election in November. The court will vote on putting the bond election on the November ballot on August 14, next Tuesday.
By the way, after we purchase and install the electronic broadcast system that we are moving through the purchasing process, you will be able to call up workshops and court sessions and view them for yourself. This will be a major leap forward in transparent county government.
The most controversial issue continues to be the construction of a building with public funds - your tax money - designed for use by private organizations. Our attorney has raised legal concerns that will have to be addressed before the bonds can be sold in years to come. Some of the court members expressed concerns about asking the voters to approve a bond issue with legal issues surrounding it. You may read my first post on this issue below dated July 29.
In preparation for the discussion on this controversial project, I visited the District Attorney's offices in the new Collin County Courthouse, located along US 75 north of McKinney. The Family Justice Division, which includes the Crimes Against Children (CAC) office, actually conducts the investigation and prosecution of family domestic violence cases. These are the offices that, in conjunction with law enforcement and the court system, conduct the "justice" part of "family justice."
The somewhat confusing title of the controversial building - the Family Justice Center - that some want to build immediately next door to the new courthouse is very close to the title of the division under the District Attorney. However, the difference is that the work in this building would be primarily social services work by a variety of organizations - not the administration of justice. As I said before, don't get me wrong, these are services that everyone agrees are valuable to the community, but do not necessarily make the organizations into government entities. The issue is not the value of the services provided by the individual organizations, but whether or not tax funds should construct the building. These organizations could be located together anywhere; they do not need to be immediately next to the courthouse on government property.
The legal issues that I mentioned earlier deal with the fact that state law does not allow us to build a building for private entities without an agreement with each individual member entity that meet certain criteria under state law. Our attorney presented his legal reservations about this project at the workshop yesterday. This extensive coordination cannot be accomplished prior to the vote next Tuesday on whether or not to include this initiative on the bond election. If the court votes to include this building at the cost of $15 million, we would in effect be asking you to agree to fund a project without knowing the legal basis for the use the project for the purpose stated on the bond election ballot. This makes no sense to me.
I will use my one vote on the court to defend your tax dollars against this improper and dubiously legal spending of public funds for private use.
Sincerely,
Keith
By the way, after we purchase and install the electronic broadcast system that we are moving through the purchasing process, you will be able to call up workshops and court sessions and view them for yourself. This will be a major leap forward in transparent county government.
The most controversial issue continues to be the construction of a building with public funds - your tax money - designed for use by private organizations. Our attorney has raised legal concerns that will have to be addressed before the bonds can be sold in years to come. Some of the court members expressed concerns about asking the voters to approve a bond issue with legal issues surrounding it. You may read my first post on this issue below dated July 29.
In preparation for the discussion on this controversial project, I visited the District Attorney's offices in the new Collin County Courthouse, located along US 75 north of McKinney. The Family Justice Division, which includes the Crimes Against Children (CAC) office, actually conducts the investigation and prosecution of family domestic violence cases. These are the offices that, in conjunction with law enforcement and the court system, conduct the "justice" part of "family justice."
The somewhat confusing title of the controversial building - the Family Justice Center - that some want to build immediately next door to the new courthouse is very close to the title of the division under the District Attorney. However, the difference is that the work in this building would be primarily social services work by a variety of organizations - not the administration of justice. As I said before, don't get me wrong, these are services that everyone agrees are valuable to the community, but do not necessarily make the organizations into government entities. The issue is not the value of the services provided by the individual organizations, but whether or not tax funds should construct the building. These organizations could be located together anywhere; they do not need to be immediately next to the courthouse on government property.
The legal issues that I mentioned earlier deal with the fact that state law does not allow us to build a building for private entities without an agreement with each individual member entity that meet certain criteria under state law. Our attorney presented his legal reservations about this project at the workshop yesterday. This extensive coordination cannot be accomplished prior to the vote next Tuesday on whether or not to include this initiative on the bond election. If the court votes to include this building at the cost of $15 million, we would in effect be asking you to agree to fund a project without knowing the legal basis for the use the project for the purpose stated on the bond election ballot. This makes no sense to me.
I will use my one vote on the court to defend your tax dollars against this improper and dubiously legal spending of public funds for private use.
Sincerely,
Keith
posted by Keith Self # 6:48 AM
Friday, August 03, 2007
The Next Step in Transportation Funding Discussion
Citizens, I am delighted at the discussion and critique being generated by my ideas concerning how the county should best use your county tax funds to address the severe and growing congestion on our major highways. The first step in order to make beneficial changes is to raise an issue so that reasoned discussion can occur. I have seen published and unpublished reports on what my ideas purport to mean. Let's examine some details in order to start fleshing out these ideas.
As the Director of Transportation at the Council of Governments (COG) states, it will take a partnership of several funding sources to build major highways in the future. No one agency will have the funds required to build the highways to support the growth in Texas from 23 million in population to over 40 million in 20 years. And 20 years is not a long time when you start discussing the development and construction of major highways. Collin County has many partners in the transportation business - COG, our cities, TxDot, and the North Texas Tollway Authority to name a few. We will have to fold together several different funding streams in order to find the billions of dollars our major highways will require in the coming years to provide relief for our current congestion and adequate construction through the years. We cannot, as a county, hope to totally fund the complete engineering and construction of the hundreds of miles of major highways we need. For example, the outer loop will extend 55 miles across Collin County over the next several decades. That road alone will cost several billions of dollars.
There are past examples of how county tax dollars have advanced the construction timeline. Collin County was very involved in development of the President George Bush Tollway. In addition, Collin County tax dollars advanced the construction timeline of the frontage roads along SH 121 - the very roads that are giving some relief to SH 121 congestion from the days of 2-lanes - days many of you remember. These are examples of how the county can affect future construction with focused and judicious use of county influence and your tax dollars.
At the higher levels, the Federal Highway Trust Fund is calculated to be underfunded by $4 billion (with a B) in 2009. After you calculate the current funding that figure affects, Texas will lose approximately $1 billion. And of course, TxDot is recalculating their highway construction fund distribution due to the 2-year moratorium imposed by the legislature this past session. The point is that in light of funding constraints at higher levels, we will have to take a more pro-active role in targeting our county tax funds where they will do the most good to relieve congestion, hasten construction, and attract other funding streams.
I do not accept the defeatist attitude that we cannot influence major highway construction. I was not trained to cringe before a challenge - not at West Point, not in the 82nd Airborne Division, not in the Special Forces Green Berets. As one of the most affluent counties in Texas, we need to take a positive attitude, we need to work together to find a way ahead, and determine together the best use of your county tax dollars to address the congestion on our major highways. The first step is to begin to air these issues and I am delighted that we have taken that first step.
As the Director of Transportation at the Council of Governments (COG) states, it will take a partnership of several funding sources to build major highways in the future. No one agency will have the funds required to build the highways to support the growth in Texas from 23 million in population to over 40 million in 20 years. And 20 years is not a long time when you start discussing the development and construction of major highways. Collin County has many partners in the transportation business - COG, our cities, TxDot, and the North Texas Tollway Authority to name a few. We will have to fold together several different funding streams in order to find the billions of dollars our major highways will require in the coming years to provide relief for our current congestion and adequate construction through the years. We cannot, as a county, hope to totally fund the complete engineering and construction of the hundreds of miles of major highways we need. For example, the outer loop will extend 55 miles across Collin County over the next several decades. That road alone will cost several billions of dollars.
There are past examples of how county tax dollars have advanced the construction timeline. Collin County was very involved in development of the President George Bush Tollway. In addition, Collin County tax dollars advanced the construction timeline of the frontage roads along SH 121 - the very roads that are giving some relief to SH 121 congestion from the days of 2-lanes - days many of you remember. These are examples of how the county can affect future construction with focused and judicious use of county influence and your tax dollars.
At the higher levels, the Federal Highway Trust Fund is calculated to be underfunded by $4 billion (with a B) in 2009. After you calculate the current funding that figure affects, Texas will lose approximately $1 billion. And of course, TxDot is recalculating their highway construction fund distribution due to the 2-year moratorium imposed by the legislature this past session. The point is that in light of funding constraints at higher levels, we will have to take a more pro-active role in targeting our county tax funds where they will do the most good to relieve congestion, hasten construction, and attract other funding streams.
I do not accept the defeatist attitude that we cannot influence major highway construction. I was not trained to cringe before a challenge - not at West Point, not in the 82nd Airborne Division, not in the Special Forces Green Berets. As one of the most affluent counties in Texas, we need to take a positive attitude, we need to work together to find a way ahead, and determine together the best use of your county tax dollars to address the congestion on our major highways. The first step is to begin to air these issues and I am delighted that we have taken that first step.
Sincerely,
Keith
posted by Keith Self # 2:04 PM
Budget Update and Monday Workshop
1. Budget update. The budget workshop took 3 days to complete. I am waiting to receive the final numbers before I report to you. There will be two posted public hearings on the budget as required by law, one of those during evening hours. At this point, there is no tax rate cut included, although our tax base increased by 10.9%. This is the reason that you know your tax bill is increasing, but politicians brag that the tax rate is level. What we ought to focus on is the dollar amount taken out of your pocket. There is still a great deal of work to be done before the final vote is taken by the court on September 11.
2. The Commissioners Court will hold a workshop on Monday, August 6 at 1 PM. Each of the possible bond election issues are on the agenda, which will be posted later today (Friday.)
This will be a good time to appear before the court and express your views on the transportation, facilities, and open space committee recommendations. If you have not yet read them, you may review my blog entries on several of the bond issues at http://www.keithself.com/
Later today, you may view the agenda at http://public1.co.collin.tx.us/public_notices/default.aspx
3. I have come to realize that the next months will determine the future direction of the Commissioners Court for years to come. These budget and bond issues are prime examples. I continue to believe that if we put the county on a path to keep taxes low, focus county spending on core government functions, and continue to protect your freedom to spend your money as you choose, we will set in place a path of continued growth with a robust and sustainable infrastructure that will grow to support our burgeoning population. We need your help. We need your participation. We need informed and engaged citizens.
I do not agree with this next quote, but I use it to demonstrate the absurdity of not addressing our congested major highways as a first priority. One of the speakers at the recent Transportation Forum said with his tongue firmly planted in his cheek, "Help stamp out affluence: we can do it if we all work together," referring to the slow decline of the transportation infrastructure that most see coming in Texas. I do not agree with him - we must not let this happen. I believe that we can move forward into a future that includes a robust infrastructure if we focus our spending on core government functions.
Sincerely,
Keith
2. The Commissioners Court will hold a workshop on Monday, August 6 at 1 PM. Each of the possible bond election issues are on the agenda, which will be posted later today (Friday.)
This will be a good time to appear before the court and express your views on the transportation, facilities, and open space committee recommendations. If you have not yet read them, you may review my blog entries on several of the bond issues at http://www.keithself.com/
Later today, you may view the agenda at http://public1.co.collin.tx.us/public_notices/default.aspx
3. I have come to realize that the next months will determine the future direction of the Commissioners Court for years to come. These budget and bond issues are prime examples. I continue to believe that if we put the county on a path to keep taxes low, focus county spending on core government functions, and continue to protect your freedom to spend your money as you choose, we will set in place a path of continued growth with a robust and sustainable infrastructure that will grow to support our burgeoning population. We need your help. We need your participation. We need informed and engaged citizens.
I do not agree with this next quote, but I use it to demonstrate the absurdity of not addressing our congested major highways as a first priority. One of the speakers at the recent Transportation Forum said with his tongue firmly planted in his cheek, "Help stamp out affluence: we can do it if we all work together," referring to the slow decline of the transportation infrastructure that most see coming in Texas. I do not agree with him - we must not let this happen. I believe that we can move forward into a future that includes a robust infrastructure if we focus our spending on core government functions.
Sincerely,
Keith
posted by Keith Self # 7:23 AM
Archives
June 2006 July 2006 August 2006 September 2006 October 2006 November 2006 December 2006 January 2007 February 2007 March 2007 April 2007 May 2007 June 2007 July 2007 August 2007 September 2007 October 2007 November 2007 December 2007 January 2008 February 2008
