Waco-area legislators charge state process to disburse federal stimulus transportation funds political and not transparent.

By Tim Woods - Waco Tribune-Herald staff writer - Tuesday, March 03, 2009

State Sen. Kip Averitt, R-Waco, worries that Texas Department of Transportation decision-makers might be considering more than just what is best for the state when allocating project funds.

Last week, TxDOT staff recommendations apparently left McLennan County without a dime of the $1.2 billion in federal stimulus funds the state received for transportation projects. Before the department’s recommendations, Waco-area officials had hoped to get $200 million in discretionary stimulus money to begin widening and rebuilding Interstate 35 from Lacy-Lakeview to near West.

The Texas Transportation Commission is supposed to vote Thursday on the projects TxDOT has proposed.

The TxDOT recommendations have caused frustration among Waco-area state legislators, who criticized the process as possibly influenced by politics and not transparent.

Averitt said the process may have become political, rather than simply a cost-benefit analysis. He referred to a statement by TxDOT spokesman Chris Lippincott to the Tribune-Herald last week, when Lippincott said that just because the stimulus money may fund 20 projects, that doesn’t necessarily mean that projects 21 through 25 get bumped up in priority.

“In my view, that’s a problem,” Averitt said Friday evening. “That tells me that there are other factors that weigh in the decisions of what projects get funded, rather than some methodical, analytical, financial analysis or cost-benefit analysis.”

He added, “I fear that the political factor gets too heavily involved sometimes.”

The senator said he doesn’t know for certain that TxDOT decisions are swayed by political pressure, “because I don’t know what their process is, but it raises the question.”

Lippincott later said the criteria were developed by local metropolitan planning organizations, then were evaluated by TxDOT staff.

“There was no way that this process would not yield fewer projects than there are needs,” Lippincott said.

The TxDOT spokesman also said that the process has only been politicized by the discussion since last week’s recommendations.

“The risk of this process becoming politicized increases with every day that it is attacked and questioned by people who don’t like the outcome,” Lippincott said.

Being in the dark about TxDOT’s decision-making process is something Averitt and state representatives Jim Dunnam, D-Waco, and Charles “Doc” Anderson, R-Waco, point to as a source of frustration.

“I think (lack of transparency) is somewhat systemic, and I think there will be some changes there at an organizational level,” Anderson said. He added, however, that he has had good experiences working with local TxDOT engineer Richard Skopik.

Dunnam was more biting in his criticism of the state agency.

“I don’t think it’s been good in any sense,” Dunnam said. “They’re very difficult to deal with. They’re very difficult to get information out of. When you try to get an explanation for rationale, you get a lot of double talk.”

Regarding last week’s TxDOT staff recommendations, Dunnam added, “(Thursday) they were saying that the Waco decisions were the result of the MPO, and I’m told that they told the MPO that the decisions were the result of a matrix that they use to prioritize projects, but they won’t give anybody a copy of the matrix. So, they have a great deal of expertise in double talk.”

Dunnam said he thinks TxDOT historically has acted “as though they are autonomous, with no level of responsibility to the taxpayers.”

Lippincott scoffed at the notion that TxDOT has been less than transparent.

“This has been the most open, transparent process that TxDOT has ever engaged in with the state’s metropolitan planning organizations,” Lippincott said. “These discussions have been going on for four months, and the people of Texas expect quick action with the stimulus funds that are being provided to our state.”

Commission to Decide

When the five-member transportation commission meets Thursday to decide on TxDOT’s recommendations, the legislators will be watching how carefully the commission examines those recommendations.

Lippincott said the committee has several options and is not required to either accept or reject any of the recommendations.

Though Dunnam stopped short of saying he sees the commission as simply a rubber stamp for TxDOT, he said “I don’t see them operating independently. I think we need to look at making them more accountable, and I think we should consider looking at a different structure for decision-making.”

Averitt said he knows all five members of the commission, three for quite some time, and thinks they will put great thought into the decision, but he again referred to what he sees as a lack of transparency.

“I think they deliberate,” Averitt said of the commission. “Here’s the problem, though. I don’t know what their process is. Nobody knows what their process is.”

Unless the commission opts to fund proposed projects in McLennan and other counties in Averitt’s district, the senator says he expects his constituents to continue making their voices heard.

Lippincott has acknowledged that TxDOT anticipated vocal criticism as soon as they saw the amount of funds weighed against the state’s needs.

“I represent 10 counties,” Averitt said. “Three of those counties, other than McLennan, had projects on the cusp of being funded, and none of them got done, (yet) some mega-projects in the Dallas-Fort Worth area got funded. So, yes, I’ve heard from folks in McLennan, Coryell, Johnson and Hood counties, and none of it is positive.”

Averitt added, “Everybody wants to know what’s going on, and, at this point, all I can say is we’re working on it.”