The TTC Transcript Part 1: June 29, 2006

Editor's note: The following is part 1 of the portion of the transcript of the June 29, 2006 TTC meeting during which the El Paso RMA was discussed and approved. The full transcript can be found here [transcript]

June 29, 2006

MR. BEHRENS: We'll go to agenda item number 6(b) now, Phil, El Paso County, the recommendation of the City of El Paso to create a Camino Real Regional Mobility Authority.

MR. RUSSELL: Thanks, Mike. And commissioners, on May 15 of this year, the City of El Paso did file a petition with the commission to form the newest regional mobility authority. The city has identified Loop 375, also known as the Border Highway, as its initial project.

Now, as required by law, the department held a public hearing on June 12, 2006. Notice of the public hearing was published in the Texas Register and the local newspaper there in El Paso. At the public hearing we had 15 individuals who spoke in favor of the creation of the regional mobility authority, five opposed to the creation of the RMA. We also received, subsequently, written comments, eight of which were in favor of forming the RMA, and one of which was opposed to the creation of the RMA.

On June 23 of this year, the regional metropolitan planning organization took this issue up and voted against the creation of the Camino Real Regional Mobility Authority. I believe the vote was about twelve to eight, if memory serves me correctly.

Commissioners, I'll be happy to address any questions you might have.

MR. WILLIAMSON: I need to establish a few ground rules because I think this one is going to take a while. Hope, is it the case that you have to leave at one o'clock, or you need to leave as close to 1:00 as possible?

MS. ANDRADE: Sir, I have to leave but I'll be right back. It should take me no more than 20 minutes or 30 minutes. 1:30.

MR. WILLIAMSON: At 1:30?

MS. ANDRADE: Yes. It starts at 2:00.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Okay, I think we have time. We also have a number of witnesses, and we have a really unique situation, this will be the first municipal or city RMA to come before the body, and that's a slightly different law than the law governing the RMAs we've dealt with in the past, so there's going to be some technical questions directed toward staff all through this. My guess is we're going to be going back and forth between staff and testimony through most of the next hour or so.

I'll try to arrange the testimony in a way that makes sense without showing prejudice one way or the other. I don't think any of us have any idea where we stand on this at the end. We're going to listen to what everybody has got to say.

Jim, can I assume you're going to be opposed to this? It's the creation of a city RMA. If you're going to be opposed to it, I'm going to go ahead and let you speak now.

MR. DILLON: Okay. Yes, I'm opposed to it, because I've got to leave anyway.

MR. WILLIAMSON: I mean nothing from this, I'm just curious, is that your daughter?

MR. DILLON: Yes, Savannah.

MR. WILLIAMSON: You have a great smile, you've been very patient and you've been watching everything and learning.

MR. DILLON: You saw that movie "Savannah Smiles"?

MR. WILLIAMSON: No.

MR. DILLON: Oh, it's excellent, "Savannah Smiles." She's only eleven, she does not want an RF ID tag to drive on Texas roads, she does not want to be micro-chipped or filmed so you can get on the highway.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Just so you know, I suspect all of us are pretty much that way. There's probably not any of us that want that.

MR. DILLON: Before I leave -- which will be right after I'm done talking -- and in an effort to garner some votes in the November election, I'm going to summarize what I think is wrong with the program.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Try to keep it around RMAs.

MR. DILLON: Right, absolutely. This scheme to build a unifying road that would tie Canada, Mexico, the United States and all of South America into a one homogenous glob of open border, heritage and identity destroying mass of un-American, revenue-generating joke that's going to wipe out tens of thousands of acres of rich farmland in East Texas -- and I know the governor cares deeply about that -- which has been in Texas families for generations and which is producing a product, namely food, that we all will need much more than we need the Chinese junk that is going to come in on the road that takes the place of these farms, even though there's an addiction to that. The oil, the Chinese junk and the cheap Mexican labor is what our leaders in Texas are addicted to.

Now, to satisfy their heinous need to fix this addiction, they've decided to build a road that the people will pay for to import more illegal Mexicans and more Chinese junk into our country and at the same time wipe out, like I said, tens of thousands of acres of farmland that belongs to Texans that have had that land in their families for generations.

Now, that land won't be surrendered easily, so what you're going to have to do then is pull out your eminent domain and in Kilo v. New London, Connecticut, the Supreme Court said that no longer is eminent domain restricted only to the taking of private property for public use but also for private use. Now, Cintra and Zachry, profiteering privately off of Texas roads while having our DPS patrol those roads for them and state employees collect the tolls for them at a nickel on the dollar, you should negotiate a better deal than that. You're getting a nickel from that Spanish guy?

MR. WILLIAMSON: Well, we're getting a nickel and we're getting a road we couldn't build otherwise.

MR. DILLON: You don't need that road if you would keep the 50 million illegal Mexicans in Mexico and the trucks that are carrying the Chinese junk through Mexican ports up into our country in China -- you wouldn't need that road.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Can I assume you're against this one also?

MR. DILLON: Yes, you can.

MR. WILLIAMSON: I want to tell you that you know you will always be welcome here.

MR. DILLON: Thank you, Ric.

MR. WILLIAMSON: You've been very respectful and we're respectful of you because you're a citizen of this state.

MR. DILLON: Thank you, Ric.

MR. WILLIAMSON: We wish you the best and we look forward to seeing you again.

MR. DILLON: When is the next meeting, by the way?

MR. WILLIAMSON: A month from now.

MR. DILLON: About a month.

MR. WILLIAMSON: It's nice to meet you, Savannah.

MR. HOUGHTON: Jim, it's in El Paso, the meeting, if you'd like to come out.

MR. DILLON: I don't know. Is there a toll road between here and there?

MR. HOUGHTON: You can throw coins out on the interstate.

MR. DILLON: Thank you.

MR. WILLIAMSON: It's good to see you. Thank you for being here, thank you for standing up. It's important that every Texan be heard.

MR. DILLON: Well, I have to.

MR. WILLIAMSON: I understand.

I think the way I want to approach this, Mayor, if it's okay with you, we always show deference to the mayor of a city when a city is involved, and if it's okay with you, Mayor, I would like to start with you. I saw your tool and I was hoping you would bring some levity to the moment. You know, my poor ticker, I've had some trouble and I've got to be very careful I don't get too stressed out.

MAYOR COOK: Chairman, commissioners, it's good to be before you today.

Almost every city in the state of Texas wants to be first for something, and I'm hoping that we're not the first petition for an RMA to ever be denied. Six years ago I finished my first year as a city council representative, and served three terms, then decided to run for mayor. Not being the smartest guy in the world, I decided I would surround myself with smarter people, so I created six economic development cabinets, one of those being an economic development cabinet for transportation issues, and I got experts in transportation issues to look at the possibility of forming an RMA.

I also studied some of the Code -- the Texas Administrative Code 43, Chapter 26.13 was the first one that I looked at -- to make sure that when we presented our petition to you that we met all the requirements of the Code, and I'm going to summarize some of those right now.

You have two things in the Code that I thought were extremely important to us. First of all, in order for us to create an RMA, we had to request that you make two findings. Those findings were, number one, that the RMA has sufficient public support -- and I'll come back to that issue in a moment -- but also the second issue that we had to approve was that the candidate projects and all the projects that we would bring to you through an RMA were going to be consistent with the Texas transportation plan, the metropolitan transportation plan, the metropolitan mobility plan, and the statewide transportation improvement plan, and also that they would benefit the traveling public.

It was mentioned earlier that our MPO voted against the RMA. Technically that's not true. What they did, we had a resolution before them to request that the RMA be established, and the actual motion that was made was to deny the resolution which is not the same, and that's an important distinction and I'll get to it as I discuss the public support.

Significant public support, according to the Code, is determined by, number one, public comments received at the public hearings, and as was pointed out to you earlier, the public hearing actually had 15 people speak in favor, five against, eight people wrote letters in favor and one against.

And just as Jim has proven to you today by coming and suggesting that he's opposed to regional mobility authorities and toll roads and micro-chipping and all kinds of other things, you're going to find the same thing even amongst elected officials, you're not going to have a unanimous decision. In running for political office, I'm usually happy for 50 percent plus one, and I think that if we can get a majority of people to support an issue, then that's very important.

The second thing that we had to do to show significant public support was to present a resolution of support from the affected political subdivision, and this is a clear legal argument that we have to make sure that we met because you had a resolution from the City of El Paso and it was supported by five out of eight council people. Once again, it wasn't unanimous support but the majority of the council supported this action.

Rule number 26.11(6)(b) which you alluded to, sir, mentions that -- El Paso is in a unique situation because that rule says that the cities of El Paso, Laredo, Brownsville, McAllen, or Port Aransas may petition the commission for approval to create an RMA in the same manner as any county, and there's a reason that that law was passed. The reason is El Paso finds itself in a very unique position especially by the makeup of our metropolitan planning organization. We have four members of the MPO that are in New Mexico, and this project does not benefit New Mexico at all. Three of those members were present and voted against the project.

Eighty-five percent of the county of El Paso is within the city limits.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Is that dirt or population?

MAYOR COOK: Population and dirt, I imagine.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Is that the geographic county or just population?

MAYOR COOK: It's population-wise, but also, I think almost the majority of the dirt also is within the city limits, and we're growing at a fantastic rate too. For example, right now Fort Bliss is getting ready to triple in size. We're expecting to increase the population of El Paso by 60,000 people within the next five years just from Fort Bliss growth alone, and we know that other growth is going to take place. Some conservative housing estimates show that that number could be as high as 80- to 100,000 people in five years.

But anyway, that Rule 26.11(6)(b) was specifically designed for the city of El Paso, knowing our unique geographic and political makeup.

The third thing that we have to do to show sufficient public support is we had to get -- and this is a quote -- "the express opinion of any of the affected MPO." Now, I would point out to you that Hidalgo County, for example, I looked at the minute order for the creation of their RMA and they did not submit a resolution from their MPO supporting the creation, and that was as late as 2005, if I recollect when that minute order was written. So it's not necessary that the MPO actually give their endorsement of the project, and that's why you had the specific terminology: the express opinion, if any. The action of the MPO was actually not to express an opinion because they voted against the resolution that asked for support of the RMA being established.

Under the public outreach or public support, let me tell you what we did. It was read into the record earlier about some of the meetings that were held, but we held two Legislative Review Committee meetings and our Legislative Committees of the city council have four out of eight of the members of the council that sit on that, and those are public posted meetings, by the way. We also had one special city council meeting just to talk about regional mobility authorities. We had one regular city council meeting where it was discussed, and at that meeting we decided to have a special meeting to invite the public to it and be more open about the establishment of an RMA.

We also had numerous public informational meetings by my transportation cabinet. Those are those experts in transportation that I talked to you about. We sent them out into the public to talk about an RMA, to educate the public as to what they were. The transportation cabinet also participated in four TxDOT meetings where they held open houses to discuss regional mobility authorities.

My transportation cabinet also had involvement in numerous neighborhood association meetings. We had actually sent out over 66 notices, mailed notices to 66 neighborhood associations and told them that we were going to be holding these meetings.

As was earlier mentioned, we had the official TxDOT hearing and the subsequent written comments that were made. For that meeting, we posted two separate notices within our local newspaper, The El Paso Times. We also posted notice two weeks in advance on our city's website so that people would know that that meeting was going to be held. We issued press releases to the media; there were two press releases that were issued to them so the media would come cover the event and let the public know that the meeting was taking place. And we also provided notices to local business organizations.

I would also like to mention another issue. Last night you made some very astute remarks, sir, and that's not just to compliment you, but you told us last night that some communities want to grow and other communities do not. You said that some communities want to use all the tools in the toolbox and others do not.

I remember a year and a half ago I came to this commission meeting and I wrote down a quotation of yours at that time, and that was that there are going to be three kinds of roads built in Texas, there are going to be slow roads, no roads, and toll roads. El Paso is going to grow, I told you 60,000 just from Fort Bliss alone. That's not an option for us, we can't wait for slow roads, and we can't accept no roads, we're ready to embrace toll roads, and we want to use every tool that's in the toolbox in order to make sure that our transportation infrastructure is second to none in the state of Texas. We have some unique challenges in El Paso, and we're hoping that you will approve the formation of our RMA today.

You did request last night that I bring my guitar because I told you I'm not the world's best public speaker, and my daddy told me that I should always end whatever my public speaking engagement is with a song so people at least can remember something positive, so last night I took the liberty of writing a song about RMAs.

(The mayor played and sang a song, followed by general applause and laughter.)

MR. WILLIAMSON: Lord God, 20 years, Richard.

We're going to wait on dialoguing with the mayor to hear the senator, and then we're going to hear one of the city councilman and the House member, and then we'll rotate after that. So Senator Shapleigh?

SENATOR SHAPLEIGH: Mr. Chair, members of the commission, everyone watching on the internet, democracy is alive and vigorous in the TxDOT Commission today. I've been to a lot of these in the last decade, I've got to say this is the most lively one I've ever been to.

El Paso, Texas today -- and I've been coming here for a decade to share our story, our hope with you -- is going to be the most going place in the country in the next decade. We're going to add between 60- and 80,000 troops and dependents to Fort Bliss, and to the extent that we can get those troops to the theaters of war and do their training, that's how we're going to be measured.

On our western side we're going to have another 70,000 in a town that's springing out of the desert in New Mexico that affects our infrastructure. We are going to have to provide the infrastructure not just for the El Paso part of this unique sliver of land that we occupy, but the infrastructure for New Mexico as well.

I was on the conference committee of both of these major bills that provided these tools, 2702 and 3588, and I'm pleased to say that everyone you're going to hear from today in our delegation, Senate and House, voted for 2702, every single one of them, and every single person you're going to hear from today voted for 3588 that you're going to hear from today from El Paso. So they voted and are on the record for the entire toolbox, including tolls.

And I mention to you that when we came to a vote on the MPO with respect to the one project, the southern relief route, it went through with a nine to three vote, with tolls, four lanes that are free that exist now, and two fast lanes so that trucks and others can come through the very unique piece of geography that we occupy and get from east to west.

You've heard in this commission what's going to happen in Long Beach, you know what's happening with double stacked, double track trains. We're going to have 130 trains a day moving through El Paso, Texas and we're going to have all the collateral truck traffic going with it.

That very unique piece of geography means that the Franklin Mountains -- which is the tail-end of the Rockies -- comes within 3,000 yards of the Mexican border, and everything goes right through that corridor, and what it's created is a very unique traffic logistical problem in El Paso which is I-10 which for whatever reason did not get the access roads that it should have gotten back in the '60s.

Our community, Fort Bliss, our entire region is invested in finding an alternative route. When there is congestion on I-10, if you've got a truck wreck or you've got a hazardous waste spill -- which is another issue we're going to need to visit on on this border -- it shuts down literally everything moving from Los Angeles to Houston, and so it is not just an El Paso issue to find an alternative route on I-10, it's a state of Texas issue.

We in El Paso are there geographically for five reasons: the military, Mexico, movement, manufacturing, and medicine. That's why we're there. When you look at Houston, it's energy primarily is why Houston is there. When you look at San Antonio, it's got military, biotech, entertainment, but when you look at El Paso, we're there for five reasons. Four of those relate to mobility and the ability to move people and product through that port, and I submit to you there is no region in Texas that will get more value from controlling our destiny with an RMA.

The RMA that was written for El Paso, I know all about because I participated in writing nearly every piece of that statute. We were the first to say let's let a city do it because we're 85 percent the city of El Paso, the first to say let's move some of this infrastructure and use some of the money to complete the loop into New Mexico, the first to say that truck congestion at the bridges is going to cost us jobs so how about using some money to put weigh stations in Mexico, the most creative approach to any RMA in the state of Texas.

We have had a vote on the southern relief route and it went through nine to three, and the issue, interestingly enough, was not tolls because everyone that is going to come talk to you here today is on the record for supporting tolls, in some manner or another, they support tolls. The project that we're talking about has two tolled lanes and four free lanes, so a truck or someone on the east side of town can have the choice of being in the fast lane and pay a toll or being in existing lanes on I-10, or the Border Highway, and get through our community.

With the growth that we have ahead of us, here's the basic choice for El Paso: we can use an RMA to finish our inner and outer loops in a decade, or we can reject an RMA and finish our inner and outer loops in a lifetime. We're the only Texas city that does not have a completed inner or outer loop of over 500,000. And when you think about what has to happen in El Paso, Texas, top priority -- and we've been talking about this, Mr. Chair for many hours -- the top priority for an area that's been as lucky as we have to get Fort Bliss, has got to be to finish our loops.

So that's the simple choice in El Paso, Texas: you do it, you take the $100 million that the RMA is going to generate of new money, you finish your loops in a decade, or you don't do it and you wait a lifetime. And the question is what does that do to El Paso if you don't do it, and I think the choice before us is as clear as any community in the state.

The City of El Paso has done everything it needs to do legally to make this happen. The project that has been voted on is the only thing that federal law requires to be voted by the MPO, and so the question is will our community seize its destiny by having an RMA to essentially double the transportation money in our region. That's the question before us today.

And I've been coming here for a long time, and I'm pleased to see great commissioners, particularly from our area of the state, participate in this discussion. But we've spent a lot of time fixing up these tools for every community to come and say this is how we want to seize our destiny and get this thing done and no community in Texas will be better off than El Paso, Texas with an RMA.

MR. WILLIAMSON: It's always good for you to be here, Senator, and you know you're welcome here.

Members, the senator will have to leave, and so if you need to dialogue with him now, this is the time to do it.

MR. HOUGHTON: I'll go last.

MR. WILLIAMSON: I'll be brief, Senator. I think it's safe to say that each of the four commissioners are very uncomfortable being placed in the position of having to mitigate what we perceive to be a disagreement in the western district of the state. I think we understand, based on the information our staff has given us, why the disagreement occurs, but I think we're uncomfortable, I think it's honest for us to say that.

But I also think that I'm an appointed guy and you're an elected guy and it's not my role to lecture you or Mr. Pickett about your business -- in fact, I'll never do that, in fact, I'll never argue with you publicly. You can say the nastiest, vilest, meanest things about me in the press you want to and I'll never say a word because you're an elected guy and I'm an appointed guy, and when I was an elected guy, I didn't like it when an appointed guy argued with me, and so I ain't going to do it.

I know you're headed back home. I want you to head back home knowing that all four of us are going to listen to what everybody has got to say today, we're going to ask our staff a lot of questions about the history of certain laws, and we're going to try to reach a judicious decision about what's best from our perspective. But I've got to tell you we're not comfortable in the position we're in right now at all. And that's all I feel like I need to say.

MR. HOUGHTON: Well, I wanted to tell the senator just generally thank you for your vision on transportation, and your support of this commission, 2702, 3588. You've had that vision. It's obvious now, with the RMAs that came before us earlier in the day, they're utilizing all the tools in the toolbox: tolling, pass-through tolling, Prop 14. They're going through those and they're integrating all of that in the planning, and with your help, again, that was made possible, and thank you for that from this commissioner and from the commission.

MS. ANDRADE: Senator, thank you for your leadership, and I'm so glad that the chairman brought out the discomfort because we don't like to get in the middle of communities and we enjoy when a community comes so united because we're all trying to do what's best for the state. And I come from a community that's taking advantage of every tool in the toolbox and I see what can happen, and when you say you want to seize your destiny, you want to get your loop done in a decade versus a lifetime, I have a hard time understanding what the disagreement is. So I just wanted to let that out.

Thank you for your leadership and I hope that we do what's right for your region and for this state because El Paso is very important.

SENATOR SHAPLEIGH: Well, Hope, I love your name and I hope you leave us with hope when we leave here. Your community is very similar to ours: you have military bases, you've got rail going in five directions, we've got rail in five directions -- that's a big blessing in today's world -- you've got freeways coming in and out, north, south, east, west. And those communities in today's world that make mobility happen are the ones that win, especially if you've got a military base.

And I do hope that we arrive at a point. We thought we were there a month ago with a fair degree of consensus with maybe one or two critics. I think there's an issue in El Paso where you've got a state next to you that has a different constitution. I would hope that they would let us evolve our own destiny and not participate in the kinds of things that are under our state law and constitution.

But when we look at communities in the future in this state and you look at the choices San Antonio has made at Kelly, the redevelopment of Kelly, the inland port concept at Kelly, the rail that you're focused on now to move goods from Monterrey right up to San Antonio, the freeways that you're putting in now, the rapid growth of your technology sector, you are what we hope to be someday. And I'm hoping that those listening to you will reflect on the lessons that you give us because San Antonio offers a lot of lessons for El Paso, Texas.

The great thing we have going for us, we've got a decade of the best growth in Texas, and we are going to be judged on how well we manage it, and if today passes without getting an RMA, we will rue the day that we didn't seize the opportunity to move people, product and troops faster, safer and more efficiently.

MR. WILLIAMSON: John?

MR. JOHNSON: Senator, it's always good to see you, whether it's here or in El Paso. I'm an idealist, a dreamer in a way, and so I think to amplify a little bit on what Ric said that we hate to put our own personal selves in what we view as a family feud. I mean, these things are called regional mobility authorities for a reason, and as the dreamer in me wants so much that there be harmony or at least consensus of harmony, there's another side of me that says, as you well pointed out, you have a very legal right to follow through on this, it's in the law, and you have every right to do that.

So that's the dynamic tension that I'm struggling with and I want to hear what the other people who want to give discussion or testimony on this issue have, but I think you can sense that's my personal feeling. I think we're all subjected to those close of competing thoughts. Appreciate your involvement in transportation around the state, and it's not limited just to your area, it's statewide, and your interest has been sincere and over the last almost eight years I've enjoyed working with you.

SENATOR SHAPLEIGH: Thank you.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Thank you, Senator.

SENATOR SHAPLEIGH: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

MR. WILLIAMSON: I think the closest equivalent I've got to the mayor would then be the county judge-elect. Mr. Cobos, I think if you don't mind, I'll let you lead off the other side, and we'll ask Mr. Pickett to follow as we asked Mr. Shapleigh to follow the mayor.

MR. COBOS: Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, commissioners. My name is Anthony Cobos, county judge-elect, County of El Paso, Texas. It's an honor to be here to discuss RMAs and the impact they're going to have on our community.

There are six municipalities within the limits of El Paso County, nine school districts, the county of El Paso abuts New Mexico. I served as an El Paso city councilor for eight years, I represented the district that abutted New Mexico. New Mexico, Sunland Park is building a port of entry that will use El Paso roads to get to I-10, so New Mexico's opinion is extremely important and very valuable on this issue.

I'm the only elected official who will come before you today who represents the entire county of El Paso. I just got off the campaign trail, knocked on a lot of doors, visited with a lot of people, and the opinions, the consensus that I heard was people are concerned, they're not trusting and they need more time on this RMA issue, and toll roads. Toll roads is one component of the RMA.

I had the honor of serving with our excellent mayor, John Cook, for four years. He's a man of integrity, I respect him very much, and I'm just glad I didn't come up after he sang that song because I would have had some big shoes to fill, but we disagree on this issue. I don't believe that the public comments have been significant, that they have been appropriate. When you have two public meetings, you have 15 people in favor, five against and you get eight letters for, one against, that's hardly reflective of the opinions of the people in El Paso County.

And you all are in a very difficult position. What you're being asked today is to create an RMA in the city of El Paso where there is much controversy on this issue. El Paso is very divided on this issue.

I was impressed, item 6 (c) you had Cherokee County, Harrison County, Rusk and Upshur that support this. It was said that the chambers of commerce support joining an RMA, the county judges support joining an RMA, the MPO supports joining an RMA. You don't have that in El Paso County. The MPO voted against. You can jazz it up however you want, they voted against a resolution creating a regional mobility authority. We need more time.

If you vote for this RMA today, you're going to be fanning the flames, you're only going to be adding to the controversy. We're all going to have to go back to El Paso, we'll remain divided, the opposition will continue to grow, it won't be a good thing if you vote for this today.

If you vote against it, we can go back, we can reconcile, we can discuss it, we can come back to you next time, if appropriate, if we so decide to come back as a united voice, as a united county. And I would ask that you vote against this because I would love to see the headlines in tomorrow's paper reading: The Texas Transportation Commission voted against creation of an RMA to give El Pasoans more time. I would hate to see a headline that read: The Transportation Commission voted for El Paso because they couldn't agree on it.

I respect your time. Thank you very much, and please vote no. Thank you.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Thank you, sir. Mr. Pickett?

MR. PICKETT: Good afternoon.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Good afternoon, sir.

MR. PICKETT: Always a pleasure. I'm going to say a few things that are off the subject, so hopefully you'll at least remember what I said because everything else I'm not sure.

Going back to Randall's presentation about Eisenhower and the 50th anniversary of the highway, a fun fact for you to remember there involved in transportation, Dwight also realized when the Autobahn was being built by the Germans, they had airplanes stashed along the Autobahn at various locations, and Dwight decided that when we did this highway that there would have to be certain sections that were absolutely straight for a specific distance so that the United States Air Force could land or take off on this highway. Just thought I'd throw that in.

Now, since that's the only thing most people will remember, let me start the other. I too must respectfully disagree with the mayor and Senator Shapleigh. Jim that was here -- and I apologize, would you apologize to Jim for me, I'm going to use him as an example -- after about the third or fourth time Jim got up, most of the people in the audience -- I won't say the committee, we've all been there -- kind of tuned him out. If he said something a little different or funny, we laughed, but we knew where he stood, we've heard it over and over. And the mayor was trying to make a point that the public is supporting this because of the meeting held June 12. The public in El Paso was tired of the issue by June 12, they had enough.

I had been personally to I don't know how many meetings and invited, and if you want to see numbers or show numbers -- and I don't want to put any of your staff on the spot -- at one particular meeting on the east side in a police station that I was invited to speak to along with TxDOT, and I didn't start this, I didn't ask for this to happen, at the end of the meeting after all sides were debated, someone said would someone do a show of hands who would support this, one hand went up, one, and there was over 50 people there, one hand went up. But those other 49 people didn't go to the subsequent meeting on June 12, they'd had enough.

This is the only place in Texas that Texas Department of Transportation spent $100,000 on buying commercials selling a product. It was no longer outreach. In the past it was we're going to have a public meeting on June 12, come on down. This was if you don't use a toll, you won't have to pay. Well, wait a minute, is that absolutely true?

In the action that was presented to the MPO last month, a lot of the members didn't realize until afterwards -- and that's why the subsequent vote last Friday -- that this is going to cost people who don't use a toll. In that action the month before, money was deleted from projects that the people in El Paso are expecting; the people from El Paso are expecting $80 million to be in the Northeast Parkway. That's no longer there, that was taken out.

So go back to the June 12 meeting and hold it again and say are you for an RMA if we delete $80 million out of Northeast Parkway, will you be for the RMA if we delete the money out of widening Interstate 10 on the west side. Let's be fair about this, let's go back and give them all those choices.

The senator has brought this up before and other people and they're trying to make me feel bad that I voted for 3588 and 2702. I thought transportation folks would be glad I voted for those, I'm proud of voting for those, but he uses it that he was proud but because I voted for it, it's a bad thing. Of course I voted for those things, they're great tools.

And Senator Shapleigh's Senate version must be different from the House version, though. I don't remember anywhere in 3588 or 2702 that says the law says you have to create an RMA, I believe it said here are the options, try this one, try that one, you all decide in your community what works, what doesn't work.

This is one of the few places where we can discuss in detail and people can follow the conversations. In El Paso it's gotten down to are you for or against tolls, and that isn't the issue. I know TxDOT has got a copy, I don't know if you've looked at it yet, Friday's proceedings. I thought it was pretty good discussions. We had some people say I'm against tolls, on the board and in the public; we had some people on the board who voted no to creating an RMA say I'm not against tolls, I'm against the RMA. So it was refreshing to hear that some of the information has started to get out at least and even some of our own board members are now splitting this and saying it's not a one issue deal.

And it's in the record we've been told that pass-through financing was for small projects, and every month I'd see you guys approving -- and gal, sorry -- projects in the multi-million dollars, and said why is it only a small for El Paso, why can't we do a big one, and then somebody proposed an unsolicited proposal and that you're wrestling with whether that's a good thing or not. I hope you support that, I support that on the record again. It's not new money, but is it one of the tools? Yes. Is it trying to fill in the gap? Yes, absolutely.

So when the mayor said that the public supports this, that is not the case, in my opinion, it is not the case. I thought we were done with this. I keep getting asked to go places, we want to understand this. Another one? They've already made up their minds.

And when you go to these outreach meetings, the first thing that TxDOT does is put up a graphic and they've got this oval and the center of the universe is the MPO, and they've got a little bullet off there that says RMA and a little bullet that says TxDOT. Well, the center of the universe last Friday said no. It doesn't matter to me whether you're going to quote verse and chapter, there's a lot of time when we pass laws as human beings, those technicalities. I was asked from the attorney general just a week ago: Would you tell me what your intent was on this amendment, Representative Pickett, because we're having some questions about what was your intention, so even though that statute is there, what was the intention?

So the mayor is saying because technically he doesn't have to get the MPO's permission, or technically the MPO didn't say no, they just rejected the resolution, put it on next month's agenda as an item: Do you support or reject an RMA? Okay, we'll see if everybody can go garner their votes and see what happens then at that point. I do believe that the people who voted on our MPO board said no to the RMA, they just didn't reject the resolution at that point.

The county judge is here saying that he, as a newly elected official, isn't wild about this. Our congressman -- and I got credit for writing the letter and it was a pretty good letter -- the congressman weighed in from our area and he said he is not in support of an RMA. He didn't say he wasn't in support of Chapter 43 or line 26, he just says I am not in support at this time -- I'll at least put that caveat in there -- I am not at this time supporting an RMA. And I believe that he thinks he has the pulse of his constituency, as I hope I do, I know the mayor does, I know Senator Shapleigh does.

So it is tough for you, no one likes to be in this position of splitting the baby. But I would tell you that you already know the facts: if you deny this request for an RMA, that does not preclude that from happening in the future, that does not preclude us from doing tolls. I do take offense from the way this was presented in my community, I take offense to the way the public was basically told that this is how it's going to be without both sides of the argument.

And I do believe there is a place for tolls. I'm fine with that being on the record; I have a plan that would include tolls. We've got a great MPO staff, one of the best in the nation, and we can come up with a good proposal.

If you were to poll all the members that were present last Friday, again, just a straw poll, do you absolutely realize what was adopted as a southern relief route? And I don't want to embarrass my colleagues, but a lot of them came to me afterwards and had no idea of the detail that was in there, they didn't know. And you can say that's an excuse, they should know, but there is trust. I know that the county judge says there's some mistrust, and that is true, but there's also some trust, and when somebody from TxDOT gets up and it's a friend of yours and somebody that you've known for a long time and they offer you a bottle of water and a nice little table for you to pick up a key chain, there's a lot of trust there and there's a lot of people trusted you all in what you are presenting, and I think you abused that. And I think it's time that we try to trust each other.

And I did agree with the judge's comment about fueling the fire on this issue. You said the MPO is the center of the universe, the MPO said no. If you violate that trust, you'll have to go back and tell all those people at those outreach meetings, public hearings that what we put up there was not what we really meant. That's it. Thank you.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Thank you, Mr. Pickett.

Richard, we're going to be for and against, for and against. Richard?

MR. DAYOUB: Good afternoon. For the record, I am Richard Dayoub, president of the El Paso Chamber of Commerce.

Chairman Williamson, Commissioner Andrade, our El Pasoan, Commissioner Houghton, Director Behrens, Mr. Polson, thank you so much for this opportunity to speak to you this afternoon. I'll do my very best to respect your time by being as brief as possible.

MR. WILLIAMSON: We reserved the day for El Paso, so take your time.

MR. DAYOUB: The whole day? I think we have a flight at five o'clock, so we're at least assured of being out of here by that.

First of all, let me thank you all for participating in last evening's event. It was our pleasure to host you and we look forward to hosting you in El Paso in late July.

With me today are several people from El Paso, business people mostly who support this initiative to move forward with an RMA, and I'd to recognize a few of them by name but I'd also like all of them to stand and be recognized who are here. Paul Foster, representing Western Refining; Stanley Jobe; Veronica Callaghan; Terry Bilderback, who is the chairman of the chamber's transportation committee, as well as he serves on the mayor's transportation cabinet. If I've left anybody out, I certainly apologize for that, but if you would just be recognized so that everyone does know that you're actually here.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Welcome.

MR. DAYOUB: My comments, while brief, are reflective of and are supported by our nearly 1,300 members in El Paso. Our membership reflects the diversity of our population. We are 80 percent Hispanic; 85 percent of our members are small business with fewer than 20 employees; they are situated across El Paso.

For those of you not intimately familiar with El Paso, our city spans nearly 30 linear miles across the community, east to west, with I-10 intersecting throughout our community. And I-10, I might add, not so ironically maybe, a few weeks when we came down for the first Annual Transportation Conference, one of our leaders, Terry Bilderback, missed his flight -- and I think this is somewhat humorous today -- because he was stuck on I-10 because of an accident and he couldn't make his flight on time. Had we had our southern relief route completed, that would have been a non-issue.

MR. WILLIAMSON: But the record will reflect all of us use that excuse every day for why we're late.

MR. DAYOUB: That's precisely right.

MR. WILLIAMSON: In Texas it's the greatest excuse in the world because we're all always late.

(General laughter.)

MR. DAYOUB: That's very true, sir. Thank you for pointing that out.

We are in El Paso, as has already been pointed out by our mayor and by our state senator, we are a growing community, and while the numbers seem to vary and sometimes perhaps exaggerate, we are, in fact, in a major growth mode. The chamber was the lead organization in helping to recruit the growth of Fort Bliss, and while we spent some seven or eight years diligently laboring in that arena at the Pentagon and Washington, with the help of our congressman, I might add, as well as our senators, Cornyn and Hutchison.

We thought that was a lot of work, but it pales in comparison to the work we have before us today as we prepare our community for the receipt of those many thousands of soldiers and their families and the other growth that's occurring around Fort Bliss, as well separately from that, the manufacturing community across the border in Ciudad Juarez.

We have roughly 350 Fortune 500 manufacturers and many of them in a growth mode to the point where the unemployment rate in Ciudad Juarez is almost virtually zero, it's lower than 10 percent. They are cannibalizing each other in trying to recruit employees. They're recruiting across the country to bring people to El Paso, to live in El Paso and work in Ciudad Juarez, all of it adding to our burden on our bridges, our already over-burdened bridges.

As is stated in the folders that I provided to you, the Greater Chamber supports House Bill 3588 and all of the tools provided within, including the formation of an RMA. It was stated that the position in our community is not so much supportive of the formulation of an RMA, and I respectfully disagree with our elected officials who have opposed this. I think our 1,300 members speak otherwise. They're all over the city and they are facing challenges getting their goods and services across the community as it continues to grow.

And one of the great things about our great city has been under our quality of life initiatives for a number of years we've had the pride of stating that we are one of the least congested communities in the nation, major communities. That can no longer be said, and certainly if the RMA is not approved, in the near term we will not be on that list any longer, to our great disappointment.

Now, Fort Bliss cannot speak on their behalf because they are prohibited from lobbying initiatives, but I can speak to the initiatives that we work with them constantly. I'm at Fort Bliss almost as much as I'm at my office, and they are constantly concerned about the infrastructure needs that we have, and perhaps our inability to continue to meet those needs, and they look to the chamber and they look to the business community to help facilitate those processes.

We have a rare and unique opportunity to prepare our community for this growth, most importantly by providing transportation infrastructure ensuring the exceptional quality of life for El Pasoans and what they currently enjoy. Part of that quality of life is the ability to navigate our roads without the congestion normally synonymous with large metropolitan areas.

It was my hope that today I would address you as a part of a group that's considered a team and finding ourselves in consensus. That, unfortunately, is not the case, but I will tell you that irrespective of your decision today, the chamber and myself, as a spokesperson for that organization, will work diligently with our elected officials, both in support of this and opposed to this, and hoping to find a unified voice coming before you.

I was captured earlier, as I listened to our friends from Brownsville and Cameron County, to speak of their partnerships and to speak of their successes, working with Mexico, working with Union Pacific Railroad. We have similar challenges in El Paso. We have the Union Pacific, we have Southern Pacific, we have Burlington Northern, and we also have them stacked in the middle of our community running parallel to our Interstate 10. So we have the same challenges that they face, but I was particularly impressed by the fact that they've taken an approach utilizing the tools of the RMA and working on those solutions and how to move the railroad transportation process out of downtown central which is a challenge we are facing as well.

I attended the first Annual Conference hosted by the Transportation Commission, and while there were many good things that came out of that and I learned a lot, I was particularly struck by the address by Secretary Mineta as he gave the keynote address at lunch, and I thought he was extremely eloquent. And what he basically touched on was we can no longer afford, if we are a growing community, to address our needs in transportation in the fashion that we've always done in the past. To do so is to put ourselves at risk.

The phrase that comes to mind to me, and we use it probably too often: If we always do what we've always done, we will always get what we have always gotten.

I think I was brief, I hope I was brief. I am available for any questions or comments. I thank you all again, on behalf of the El Paso Chamber of Commerce, for your time.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Don't leave. I think we're going to do questions and comments after we hear from everybody. Thanks.

Council Member Lozano.

MR. LOZANO: Good morning. Of course, our regional mobilities are regional, it doesn't have any borders. Anyway, I'm Jose Alejandro Lozano, District 3; I represent 77,000 citizens in El Paso. And of course, with all due respect to Mr. Richard Dayoub, he represents the great citizens, business owners of our community which I respect, Mr. Paul Foster, Mr. Stanley Jobe, and many others that really provide a lot of good to our community.

But it's about our community in general, Honorable Chair and commissioners. Every Tuesday we sit in the chambers in El Paso and hear the requests of citizens, their cries, their hurts, their situations, but many times we only hear them and we don't listen to them, we just do what government wants many times. And this is about our citizens in general, all of them, the region: New Mexico, El Paso, the surrounding communities, Ciudad Juarez. We have to work together. Today I hope that you listen to our concerns.

I agree two weeks the vote of the MPO for the RMA. You have to remember there was 15 elected officials in that commission, the other ones are city employees, and I have a problem with that. Out of the 15 elected officials, eleven voted no, only four elected officials voted for it. These are the voices of the citizens of the community of El Paso, of the whole county, all the mayors and the representatives.

Today I will also ask you don't take any action today. We need to work out our differences, we need to go back to El Paso and maybe consolidate the MPO and the RMA and make it elected officials, by the whole community, by the whole county, and be members of the voice of the community, the elected officials. We need citizens to be responsible and responsive and accountable to the voters of this great state.

Thank you very much. I'm against, of course, you know; if you cannot take any action.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Thank you, sir.

Council Member Ortega?

MR. ORTEGA: Good morning, commissioners, Chair Williamson. And a special good morning to Ted Houghton, who I want to thank all that you've done for the city of El Paso and the great state of Texas. I happen to represent Mr. Houghton on the El Paso City Council, and I support the RMA.

And just taking a look at the tenor of the debate, I feel it's come down to whether or not the MPO is a proxy for public support, and I will submit the answer to that is no. There are 15 elected officials on the MPO but the way that I view the selection process, a lot of times the government leader, and in our case the mayor, will select which council members sit on the MPO. For the city of El Paso, in our case we have three selected in addition to the mayor. This can be manipulated and it can be manipulated with the other government entities in El Paso County as well.

The sponsoring organization here is the City of El Paso and the eight representatives and the mayor were all publicly and properly elected by the citizens of the city of El Paso. Of all the elected officials that sit on the El Paso City Council, you have six of the nine public supporting the RMA, two-thirds of the city council publicly supports the RMA. We're held accountable to the citizens that we represent. We have spent a lot of time going out to the community.

I think if you take a look at some of the measures that have been taken in El Paso, we've exceeded the requirements, we've exceeded due diligence and community outreach, and I think there's something to be said for that. Some of the elected officials have said, Well, let's wait for there to be community consensus. And if you take a look at the history of El Paso and the politics in El Paso, if you wait for community consensus, you'll be waiting forever, it's not going to happen. I think the time to act is now.

We've had the senator, we've had the mayor state the burden that El Paso is now facing with increased population from Fort Bliss which is artificially induced, and you also have a very high natural population increase. El Paso is the 24th fastest growing city in the United States of America and our transportation infrastructure needs are not being met.

So in asking and questioning these issues of community support, I would ask you to take a look at the makeup of the council members, take a look at the support from the mayor who was properly elected by the citizens of the community, who is held accountable to those folks, and I think there is public support for this.

I'd finally just say a couple of comments were made concerning the discomfort, and I will be the first to agree. Going out to the community initially and talking about the RMA, there is a lot of discomfort, there's no doubt about it. At the beginning of the meeting we had a presentation on Dwight Eisenhower and the national transportation network that he embarked upon, and I'm sure he had discomfort too. But after doing due diligence, I think we've done our due diligence, after you take a look at the arguments that have been made, I hope that you will find that although there is discomfort, at the end of the day it's the right thing to do.

And so I, for one, am asking you for your support on this petition. Thank you very much.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Thank you. Eddie? Now, I've got to ask you, is it your father that's the transportation guy?

MR. HOLGUIN: No, sir.

MR. WILLIAMSON: I met him, he's a nice guy.

MR. HOLGUIN: Mr. Chairman, honorable commissioners. I'm Eddie Holguin, Jr., city representative for the Mission Valley in El Paso, Texas. I'm here to speak on behalf of the 77,000 people of my district that I represent on the important issue of regional mobility authority.

To date, the members of our very own regional metropolitan planning organization, our state delegation, the bulk of the cities in the region, as well as county elected officials oppose the implementation of a regional mobility authority. Frankly, we agree with those that have serious concerns about the impact of implementing an RMA. Regarding the accountability of a new government, my constituents do not want an RMA and they completely reject the idea.

Do not misunderstand, El Paso wants to move forward with important projects and we'll explore every avenue of financing, however, we feel an RMA at this time is not the right vehicle for our region, it will not help us go where we want to go. We want to keep the maximum flexibility with maximum accountability, but we need taxpayers and voters in control of the process and their decisions. We do not need an authority with potential conflicts of interest and little local accountability.

Today you will hear and you've heard from some elected officials that purport to represent the majority of our region, and make no mistake, they do not speak for the people of El Paso. Every poll that has been conducted shows clearly that the people in El Paso do not support an RMA.

Furthermore, my own view is that we must let the people decide; the decision should not be in the hands of a few but in the discretion of the many. That is the American way. Allow our people to vote for or against an RMA. Most of the elected officials already have and we've said we do not want one. So if you're not going to listen to the elected officials, then let's listen to the people of El Paso.

Texas has always demonstrated its independence and our history is one of fighting tyranny. Let's respect the democratic process, and on behalf of the 77,000 people that I represent, I respectfully request that you do not approve an RMA for El Paso today.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Thank you, sir.

Now, Hope, we have to make a decision. It's 1:15, we have a variety of public transportation matters we have to take up, I know that you want to take them up with public transportation persons who are here to participate, I know they're going to take longer than 15 minutes. Do you wish for us to lay this matter aside for a moment and proceed with that, or do you wish to proceed with this which I judge is going to take probably about 45 minutes, or would you rather me just make the decision and take you off the hook?

MS. ANDRADE: Mr. Chairman, I would like to participate, and my concern also is that I have to take the staff with me. So if it's all right with you and if you think we can take care of this by 1:40, I'd like to take care of those issues.

MR. WILLIAMSON: The El Paso or the PTN?

MS. ANDRADE: PTN. And then come back and it might be that we'll still be in the El Paso discussion.

MR. WILLIAMSON: I think it will be about 45 minutes of El Paso.

Okay. Well, Mike, I want to rest on this matter for a moment to give all the members a chance to kind of digest what they've heard and form their questions, and I want to move to the first PTN item on the agenda.

MR. BEHRENS: That would be agenda item number 8, and this we're talking about public transportation and looking at awarding the various federal programs that are available for funding. Eric?

MR. GLEASON: Good afternoon. For the record, my name is Eric Gleason, director of the Public Transportation Division for TxDOT.

This minute order authorizes the allocation of $5,682,411 of Federal Transit Administration Metropolitan Planning Program funds, Section 5303, and $1,666,210 of State Planning and Research Program funds, Section 5304, for public transportation.

Section 5303 funds are allocated using the latest census data so that metropolitan planning organizations receive funds based on the ratio of each MPO's population to the total population of all MPOs. They are used to support a variety of activities, including management and economic feasibility studies, evaluations of previously funded projects, development of transportation plans, TIPs and other related activities preliminary to and in preparation for improvements to public transportation systems, facilities and equipment.

Section 5304 funds are used to offset eligible department administrative expenses and to provide financial assistance for planning support in a variety of ways in a variety of different areas throughout the state, either by department direct expenditure or grant award. And should grant awards be needed under this program, those awards will be recommended under a separate minute order.

We recommend approval of this minute order.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Any testimony?

MR. BEHRENS: Not on this one.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Okay, members, you've heard staff's explanation and recommendation, we have no testimony. What's your pleasure?

MR. HOUGHTON: So moved.

MS. ANDRADE: Second.

MR. WILLIAMSON: I have a motion and a second. All those in favor of the motion will signify by saying aye.

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. WILLIAMSON: All opposed, no.

(No response.)

MR. WILLIAMSON: Motion carries. Thank you, members.

Later in the meeting

MR. WILLIAMSON: Motion carries.

And Hope, I'd really like the El Paso persons start again, I know there's a couple of other things that you're kind of interested in.

MS. ANDRADE: Mr. Chairman, thank you for accommodating us, and our staff and representatives are going to go to the meeting, and I've already sent them a message that I will be delayed so that I could participate in the El Paso vote.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Well, I know they're back in the back, or some of them, not all. We're going to take exactly three minutes to kind of stretch, and then we're going to start with Chuck. Chuck Berry, are you here? I'm assuming Chuck Berry is someplace. I'm going to start by asking Chuck and Amadeo and Phil some questions, if you don't mind.

(Whereupon, a brief recess was taken.)

MR. WILLIAMSON: We'll come back to order from a brief recess, and Mike, let's return to the item on the agenda concerning El Paso. With your indulgence, I'd like to visit with Chuck Berry, our district engineer.

Chuck, I have a few questions. This is one of those rare times where I don't have a sense of where the commission is, and so we're going to have to kind of flesh things out from the darkness of ignorance perhaps to the sunshine of revelation.

Much has been made by some of the testimony about whether or not the establishment of a city RMA is supported by the public, and I made notes on the testimony, there was a considerable amount of reference to the MPO vote. What percentage of people who live in El Paso County, as far as you know, live inside the city limits of El Paso?

MR. BERRY: We've been reporting 85 percent.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Do you know off the top of your head the percentage of people who live in El Paso County who were represented by mayors or other locally elected officials that voted to not support the resolution?

MR. BERRY: No.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Would that be something you could calculate?

MR. BERRY: Right here, right now, probably not. Most of those areas, if not all of them, were represented at that meeting, including the area that's represented in southern Dona Ana County, Dona Ana being New Mexico. So there was a good representation at that MPO meeting for people that were outside the city limits of El Paso.

MR. WILLIAMSON: And do you have any idea what percentage of people live outside the city of El Paso that don't live inside of one of those cities? In other words, if 85 percent live inside of El Paso, do the other 15 percent live inside other cities or does 10 percent live in the country and 5 percent live in incorporated cities?

MR. BERRY: It's probably close to split; that would be my estimate: split between the people that are inside the incorporated areas and those that are not. Because there are several communities that are out there that are not incorporated areas and yet they're pretty good sized groupings of people.

I'm now remembering that our Montana Vista area in the northeast part of the county along 62/180 is a huge population center that's growing out there that is not represented by a city, they would be inside the El Paso County.

MR. WILLIAMSON: The project that is referenced in the RMA application has been represented to us to have been approved by the members of the MPO. Is that correct?

MR. BERRY: That is correct.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Was that project approved as part of their normal plan?

MR. BERRY: The approval was for the purpose of including it in the metropolitan transportation plan. The project had been included in parts but we needed to have it included with the mobility proposals, the express toll lane part of the project that was to be a major part of the funding, so we needed to have that incorporated into the planning.

MR. WILLIAMSON: And when that was done, was there any context of the RMA? What was the discussion at that point about who would sponsor the toll lanes, who would come up with any equity if necessary? Was it going to be a TxDOT project?

MR. BERRY: There was very little discussion on the finances of the project. Typically it was just the numbers for the cost, where the money was coming from, but not who would be sponsoring the project. When the RMA issues would come at that point, we were deferring them to a later date because although they complement each other, we don't have to have it as a part of the program, it could run in a couple of different options.

MR. WILLIAMSON: The beginning and the end of the project, are they both located inside the city limits of El Paso?

MR. BERRY: That is correct, yes, sir.

MR. WILLIAMSON: Members, I'm no doubt going to have some more questions for Chuck, but if you have some questions you want to ask of him, please do so. You don't have to.

MR. HOUGHTON: I do. Chuck, it's been represented that money was spent on a public awareness campaign. Can you talk about that a little bit from your perspective?

MR. BERRY: Yes, sir. Typically the El Paso District tries to go out and [transcript pt. 2]