Pickett's transportation amendment drives CRRMA issue toward future elections

Come election time in two years, El Paso might face another stormwater utility-like decision.

Or, in two or three weeks, the issue might be moot.

El Paso infrastructure wonks -- political and civic -- were surprised late last week when state Rep. Joe Pickett added an amendment to HB 300 that would allow the City Council to take control of the Camino Real Regional Mobility Authority.

HB 300 is the bill that keeps the Texas Department of Transportation alive past this year, when it's due to 'sunset,' a term that means the legislation that allows it to exist will expire.

Pickett's amendment was one of close to 200 filed on HB 300 (see item 131, page 28), and reflects widespread statewide discontent with TxDOT.

The bill passed the House, but must go through the Senate, which will not agree with the House version. It will go to a conference committee, where negotiators from the Senate and the House will try to reach a compromise.

Pickett, as a major player in state transportation, will be part of the negotiating team on the House side. He is chairman of the House Transportation Committee (under a Republican speaker, at that), and has been a leading state critic of TxDOT.

Likely to be part of the Senate negotiating team is state Sen. Eliot Shapleigh, who is a frequent policy opponent of Pickett.

He'll try to strip Pickett's amendment.

If he does, the issue, as stated above, becomes moot (perhaps -- we'll get back to that in a bit).

If he cannot, it could set up an interesting transportation policy debate in the next round of City Council elections.

The Camino Real Regional Mobility Authority is a seven-member body with the chairman appointed by the governor and six members appointed by the El Paso City Council. The CRRMA, as it states on its Web site has "the authority to study, evaluate, design, finance, acquire, construct, maintain, repair and operate 'transportation projects.' "

There are a few big-money pieces on the political board. Water and transportation are two of the biggest.

As with the Public Service Board, the argument can be made that the appointed, not elected, CRRMA holds huge powers but is not under direct public control. The other side of that argument is that an elected body can swing wildly here and there, preventing long-term decisions from being made and leaving the community with stunted, piecemeal projects.

Aside from the policy issue, it also illustrates the familiar political divide.

In June, 2006, when the Texas Transportation Commission met to consider whether to grant El Paso approval for the CRRMA, Pickett, El Paso County Judge Anthony Cobos and city Reps. Eddie Holguin and Alejandro Lozano were among those speaking against it.

Among those on the other side who wanted the mobility authority were El Paso Mayor John Cook, city Rep. Steve Ortega and Shapleigh. [meeting transcript pt 1] [meeting transcript pt 2]

The city sought permission from the state to create the mobility authority because the county would not. Elsewhere in the state, the regional mobility authorities have been established by counties.

There is another powerful transportation group in El Paso, the Metropolitan Planning Organization. The MPO is essentially a federally mandated planning group that includes representatives from El Paso and surrounding community, and it sets transportation priorities for the region. But it does comparatively little financing as compared to TxDOT or the CRRMA, and does not build roads, as do both those agencies.

The relationship between the CRRMA and the MPO is complex. Essentially, Pickett used his position on the MPO to block the CRRMA from going full steam ahead because the MPO plays a role in prioritizing regional projects.

Pickett called the CRRMA an extension of TxDOT, and argues that were it not for his efforts, the CRRMA would be building toll roads.

As it is, the CRRMA's first project was what is called Spur 601, the Inner Loop from Fred Wilson through Fort Bliss to Loop 375.

Pickett wasn't the only one to work through the MPO to slow down the CRRMA. In June, 2006, U.S. Rep. Silvestre Reyes wrote a letter urging the MPO to vote against a resolution in support of creating the CRRMA.

With all that water under the bridge and/or backing up, Pickett's amendment to HB 300 is yet more snowmelt heading downstream.

Cook and some other officials are miffed, to say the least, that Pickett did not give a courtesy nod by letting them know about his amendment.

Pickett's response: "I don’t represent the city of El Paso, I represent the constituents of El Paso."

One observer who spends time on transportation issues put the local and state issues in perspective. On the local level, setting up an electoral confrontation over City Council control of the CRRMA "was done intentionally by Pickett."

And why not? Said Pickett: "If I were some of the City Council members, I would like to have this option in the future."

Go back to the 2006 Texas Transportation Commission meeting and see if you can figure that one out. By the way, about the issue becoming moot, if Shapleigh is successful in stripping Pickett's amendment, he might have an issue to explain when he's up for re-election next year.

On the statewide level, said the observer of Pickett's amendment, "like the majority of state representatives who have this beef with TxDOT, they're going to nitpick as much as possible and see how far they can go with it."

After the dust settles in conference, and assuming the bill is not vetoed by the governor and/or a special session is required, we'll know in a few weeks how far up the road they got, both statewide and locally.