info@TexansAgainstHSR.com
+1 866-319-7756
P.O. Box 245 Jewett, Texas 75846
DONATE

PRESS RELEASE February 11, 2016

by | Feb 11, 2016 | Blog Article, Press Releases | 0 comments

TEXANS AGAINST HSR COORDINATES WITH
TEXAS A&M STUDENT SENATE TO OPPOSE DALLAS HOUSTON HSR

Jewett, Texas – In a nearly unanimous roll call, the Texas A&M University Student Senate, speaking on behalf of the student body, sent a clear message Wednesday night condemning the use of eminent domain by a private company, specifically the proposed Dallas Houston High-Speed Rail project. Texas A&M Senate Bill 68-36, entitled the Eminent Domain Opposition Act, was authored by Wayne Beckermann, Vice President of Municipal Affairs and public administration master’s student in the Bush School of Government and Public Service, and sponsored by Rules and Regulations Committee Chair Carlos Sonka, a senior petroleum engineer major.

Although Texas Central Partners has promoted Texas A&M University and Sam Houston State University student support for their project, Texas A&M student senators were only contacted late last year to garner official support. Chair Sonka reached out to Texans Against High-Speed Rail recently to get information to support their proposed act, and TAHSR responded with information, as well as coordinating speakers for their meeting, including State Senator Charles Schwertner, State Representatives Trent Ashby and John Wray, County Judges Ben Leman (Grimes) and Trey Duhon (Waller) and TAHSR President Kyle Workman, all of whom represent areas that would be negatively impacted by the proposed HSR.

As part of the justification for their project, Texas Central has identified Texas A&M University students as a key customer base and long touted them as supporters. However, university student senators recognized the potential for private property rights infringement and took swift action, sending a clear message to the company and investors. Chair Sonka said following the successful passage of his bill, “I am proud our body was able to see through the well-funded special interests and professional lobbyists that tried to influence us, and clarify – overwhelmingly – that Texas A&M students are against the use of eminent domain and will not support the rail’s taking of private property from unwilling sellers.” The student senate ultimately voted 60 – 2 for the act showing that every facet of Texas A&M, through the various caucuses, stands united in opposition to the general use of eminent domain by private companies and, specifically, the expected use of eminent domain by the Dallas Houston HSR.

Vice President Beckermann supported the opposition bill by responding to Texas Central’s vague and inconsistent information about their project. “We’re being asked to support ‘It depends.’ And that’s just not going to work. I’m not okay with this body, this institution, supporting something that still ‘depends.’ We need private companies to approach us before using us, we need to develop hard stances on things like this, and that’s exactly what this bill is about.”

In last night’s senate meeting, Rep. John Wray said, “What I want to ask you to do is to vote in favor of this bill, because if you do that you’re voting in favor of property rights. If you do that you’re voting in favor of fair market value. If you do that you’re voting in favor of keeping the phrase ‘willing’ in front of the phrase ‘seller.’ And you’re voting to uphold the free market.”

The landslide 60 votes to support the bill indicate when given available data and additional background from Texas Central as well as those officials opposed to the project, it is hard to support this private company use of eminent domain. “I argue that there certainly is not a public benefit that is consistent with the threshold of public benefit that has been long established in the State of Texas,” Judge Leman said in the meeting held on the Texas A&M campus in College Station. “I consider it to be a private project for a private purpose.”

Texans Against High-Speed Rail applauds the members of the Texas A&M Student Senate taking a strong stance on private property rights in Texas and for being the voice of all Texas A&M students. Despite Texas Central claims, Texas A&M students are now added to the long list of those who do not support this HSR project.

Kyle Workman said, “Along with our state and local elected officials, TAHSR is proud to stand with the Texas A&M University Student Senate to oppose eminent domain by private companies. This is yet another clear message that Texans value their private property rights, and, as taxpayers, we remain concerned about inevitable taxpayer subsidies when this Japanese funded project fails to meet its financial obligations.”

Please visit www.TexansAgainstHSR.com for more information about Texans Against High-Speed Rail, Inc. and TAHSR Land Defense Fund.

###

Download / Print

PRESS RELEASE February 2, 2016

by | Feb 2, 2016 | Blog Article, Press Releases | 0 comments

TEXANS AGAINST HSR ANNOUNCES LAND DEFENSE FUND AND LITIGATION PARTNERSHIP WITH THE BECKHAM GROUP

Jewett, Texas – As opposition to the Dallas Houston HSR continues to grow, the leadership of Texans Against High-Speed Rail has created a special litigation partnership with Dallas law firm, The Beckham Group, as well as formed a new Texas nonprofit corporation named TAHSR Land Defense Fund. Blake Beckham, co-founder of The Beckham Group, will champion the private property right of Texans by focusing his litigation efforts on stopping the project to protect landowners whose property would be devastated by this unwarranted project.

Because eminent domain is typically a last resort, and this project is far from the point of being approved to acquire property through eminent domain, the TAHSR Land Defense Fund was created to offer landowners a collective effort to protect their lands and ecologically sensitive natural resources and wildlife from being harmed long before eminent domain is necessary. This should ease the burden from landowners to retain individual counsel at this point. TAHSR Land Defense Fund is a Texas nonprofit corporation, which is applying for tax exemption under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code to be effective for 2016; if the IRS grants the exemption, donations to the fund may be tax deductible.

Mr. Beckham said of his collaboration with TAHSR, “When faced with the prospect of a private company, Texas Central Partners, backed largely by Japanese interests, attempting to misuse the power of eminent domain to scar the beautiful countryside of Texas, I knew this cause needed my legal experience. Texas landowners and taxpayers should not have to bear the devastation this unneeded project will bring to our state.”

Kyle Workman, president of Texans Against High-Speed Rail, shared at a recent private meeting of Land Defense Fund members, “Texans Against High-Speed Rail represents a broad coalition of Texans who oppose the proposed HSR, and with the recent formation of the Land Defense Fund, landowners now have a way to support a legal fight that no one landowner should shoulder alone. Mr. Beckham, who is committed to stopping the project entirely…not simply moving it off his own property, will work with us to protect some of Texas’ most precious land.”

Please visit www.TexansAgainstHSR.com for more information about Texans Against High-Speed Rail, Inc. and TAHSR Land Defense Fund.

###

Download / Print

PRESS RELEASE January 12, 2016

by | Jan 12, 2016 | Blog Article, Press Releases | 0 comments

TEXAS OFFICIALS VOW TO OPPOSE JAPANESE RAIL PROJECT

Jewett, Texas – Yesterday, thirty-three Texas officials sent a letter to The Honorable Kenichiro Sasae, Japan’s Ambassador to the United States, pledging to oppose the Dallas to Houston High-Speed Rail (“HSR”) Project proposed by Japanese rail interests. Elected and appointed officials representing the areas that will see irreversible harm to communities and property values, while having no benefit to citizens, including state legislators, county judges, county commissioners and sub-regional planning commission members, have all signed the letter.

Grimes County Judge Ben Leman said, “This letter sends a strong message that after considering all the information available, there is even more opposition to this HSR Project. Citizens clearly do not want this HSR to trample on the Texas constitutional protection of private property rights for the benefit of Japanese businesses. This Project is simply not viable in Texas, and the Japanese should look to other markets where there is local support.”

The letter reflects the overwhelming local opposition to the Project and follows a Legislative session in which the Texas Senate overwhelming supported a rider on the appropriations bill prohibiting any state support for HSR. Ultimately, the rider was removed only after the Texas Department of Transportation testified that they are not authorized to provide support for the HSR Project under current law. To date, no HSR Project has ever been completed and operated without significant public financing.

Leman went on to say, “As a County Judge whose county would be decimated by this unnecessary rail project, I will do everything within my power to protect the health, safety and welfare of our citizens.”

Texans Against High-Speed Rail represents a broad coalition of Texans who oppose the proposed HSR Project and garnered support for the letter to Ambassador Sasae. Kyle Workman, president of Texans Against High-Speed Rail, stated, “We appreciate the support of our officials in opposing this HSR project. This project is not just an issue of unwarranted use of eminent domain, but also one of eventual taxpayer subsidies that will impact all Texans. Our officials understand the full magnitude of the damage that can be done because of this, and I applaud their fortitude in standing with and for the citizens they represent on this issue.”

Please visit www.TexansAgainstHSR.com for more information about Texans Against High-Speed Rail, Inc.

Click here to view the letter to Ambassador Sasae.

###

Download / Print

Vice President Biden: High-Speed Rail in Texas is Worth the Risk?

by | Nov 23, 2015 | Blog Article | 0 comments

In November 2014, Texans overwhelmingly passed a constitutional amendment that diverted general revenue to funding roads. Just one year later, Texans hit the polls again and with a resounding 83% calling for more road funding by passing Proposition 7. Texans have sent a clear message. They want their roads! Texans love the independence that roads bring. The proposed Dallas to Houston High-Speed Rail project is not mass transit. And it most definitely will not solve the intra-city traffic problems of Dallas and Houston; nor will it solve the nonexistent intercity traffic jam on I-45. This proposed project will only serve a very narrow segment of the population that can afford to pay costs comparable to that of an airline ticket. Let’s remember, also, that high-speed rail is “successful” (not profitable, though) only where traditional passenger rail is already successful. When was the last time you rode a train full of commuters between Houston on Dallas?

Photo courtesy of The Dallas Morning News

Vice President Joe Biden was in Dallas this week championing for the Dallas Houston project, calling it “vital for America to prosper in the 21st century.” While at this event, Vice President Biden was quoted as saying, “Ten years from now, you will look back on the risk you took,” acknowledging the obvious risks associated with the project. High speed rail worldwide is heavily subsidized. The inevitable taxpayer takeover of this project is not a risk that Texans can afford.

With his visit to promote the HSR, Vice President Biden highlighted the desire of the Obama administration to see HSR throughout the US and specifically in Texas. However, several factors indicate this is too risky of a project for Texans. Representatives of Texas Central are on record stating numerous times that the Japan Bank for International Cooperation will be the largest debt provider for the project. Hopefully, the Japanese government will recognize the lack of viability for this project. With a Japanese public-private partnership in the works to cover some $40million of the project, the Japanese public should be concerned as well.

The Dallas Morning News has quoted Texas Central Senior Advisor, and former Dallas mayor, Ron Kirk as stating that Texas Central will “aggressively pursue” federal loans if they are available.  This “privately” funded project is becoming more and more public. Borrowing money from the government for a project that is destined for government control is simply a bad idea.

Another blow to the project is that now, due to environmental and cost constraints, this is no longer a downtown to downtown project. The project is slated to stop outside the Houston at HWY 290 and the 610 Loop. Riders heading downtown would need to find alternative transportation to reach their final destination.

As VP Biden calls for HSR in Texas, the citizens of Texas, who overwhelming do not support the current administration, really should be questioning the validity of this high-speed rail project. Our property rights, taxes and way of life all hang in the balance.

Texas Central claims “free movement”

by | Sep 30, 2015 | Blog Article | 0 comments

Click to enlarge. Will open in a new window. Check your pop-up settings.

Click to enlarge. Will open in a new window. Check your pop-up settings.

Texas Central claimed today on their Facebook page that their “engineers are designing the high-speed railway with landowners in mind by creating FREQUENT and CONVENIENT points of elevated train tracks. Free movement of people, equipment, vehicles, livestock and wildlife is one of our main priorities.” However, on their own website they refer to their tracks as an obstacle by stating, “Of course any corridor—no matter how narrow—becomes an obstacle if you need to get to the other side.”

Click to enlarge. Will open in a new window. Check your pop-up settings.

Currently, people, equipment, vehicles, livestock and wildlife move freely without any enclosed high-speed rail track impeding movement. Upon review of Texas Central’s Step 1 Screening of Corridor Alternatives Report there is no mention of free movement as one of their priorities. It is clear their priorities are financially driven. Page 22 of the report states the evaluation criteria used for weighting the corridor selection process is that financial and project delivery consideration is double weighted compared to engineering and environmental considerations.

Click to enlarge. Will open in a new window. Check your pop-up settings.

Click to enlarge. Will open in a new window. Check your pop-up settings.

Therefore, “The weighting selected reflects the critical importance of financial viability for the Project.” Page 132 states, “From an environmental impact evaluation standpoint, the alternatives with less developed and undeveloped lands were considered preferred.” It goes on to say, “The alignment with the most agricultural acreage in this analysis is the Utility Corridor Alignment and thus is the most favorable alignment based only on the land cover factor.” Page 140 is the “Corridor Evaluation Stoplight Chart.”  While the evaluation considers many factors including financial viability, ROW acquisition, constructability issues, crossings, and prime farmland, there is no consideration for “free movement,” which is odd since they claim it to be a “priority.”

Click to enlarge. Will open in a new window. Check your pop-up settings.

Click to enlarge. Will open in a new window. Check your pop-up settings.

The Step 1 Screening of Corridor Alternatives Report is peppered with references to crossings of railroads, pipeline, roads and utility lines, yet no mention of crossings on private property. The true priorities are found on page 148.

  • “…the Utility Corridor Alignment would present the fewest construction challenges and the least risk of financial viability given expected decreased costs and risks.”
    • “The Utility Corridor Alignment stands out from the other alignment alternatives in terms of infrastructure crossings..”
    • “The Utility Corridor Alignment has the lowest number of crossings…”
    • “The Utility Corridor alignment would provide a more direct alignment through rural areas. This would ease construction requirements, make construction access easier, reduce costly impacts to existing development, reduce impacts to traffic, ease use of more advanced viaduct construction approaches, and allow for an accelerated construction schedule, which is critical for a privately funded project that will need to provide a reasonable return on investment for Project shareholders.”

Click to enlarge. Will open in a new window. Check your pop-up settings.

Click to enlarge. Will open in a new window. Check your pop-up settings.

The reality is that the free movement of people, livestock and wildlife is not a priority to the developers of this business venture backed by Japanese investors. Financial considerations are the bottom line and additional crossings equal increased costs.

Texas Central is not recreating the wheel. They are hoping to deploy technology already being utilized in Japan. Presumably, they know the specs and estimates of how much each crossing would cost to construct, as well as how many they could construct while still being financially feasible. But even while maintainting that they are committed to working with landowners, they have yet to provide any details on how much and how often they will provide access to landowners. The only real priority we have seen regarding landowners is when Texas Central made it a top priority to be in Austin to oppose any legislation supported by landowners, who were really making it a priority to protect their land and livelihoods. It was very clear that investor confidence was their only priority and not “working with landowners.”

So…Texas Central…landowners want to know exactly how often and how much access they will be granted after their land is taken. But, at this point, various access scenarios would at least make it seem like landowner access is even somewhere on the list.

The volunteers at TAHSR are working to make sure private property owners have unobstructed access to their properties by stopping this project.  Please help us by joining TAHSR today.

FRA releases report that still does not eliminate proposed routes

by | Aug 17, 2015 | Blog Article | 0 comments

Last week the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) released it’s Corridor Alternatives Analysis Technical Report. Although the FRA expressed it’s further investigation efforts will be directed at the Utility Corridor, the FRA will retain the other proposed routes (BNSF, UPRR and I-45) for further review should something arise along the Utility Corridor and portions of those other corridors are needed.

FRA Report Table

On page 15 of the report, the FRA states,

FRA determined that the Utility Corridor should be retained for further investigation. It has the potential to meet TCR’s purpose and technical requirements for high‐speed passenger rail service between the Dallas and Houston metropolitan regions. There are no physical characteristics, operational feasibility, or environmental constraints at this first planning stage that would result in FRA eliminating the Utility Corridor from further consideration. Therefore, FRA carries the Utility Corridor forward into the alignments screening analysis. FRA’s next step will be to identify and screen potential location alternatives within corridors and potential station area alternatives. FRA also determined that the BNSF, UPRR, and I‐45 Greenfield Corridors should be retained for further investigation for portions of these corridors in the event that constraints arise along the Utility Corridor that warrant potential location alternatives within portions of these eliminated corridors that avoid the constraints.

Based on the evaluation documented in this report, a second screening analysis will be conducted. The second screening analysis will provide a more detailed evaluation of the range of potential location alignments near and within the Utility Corridor recommended in this Corridor Alternatives Analysis. Combined with station area locations, the alignments screening analysis will evaluate the location alignments within this corridor to identify the Build Alternatives that will be the subject of the evaluation in the EIS.

To view or download the full report, click the image below: