Bond vote may not clear up Texas 130 right-of-way issue

Travis County Proposition 4, if passed, may still be a shot in the dark. The argument over who will pay for the right of way of Travis County's portion of Texas 130 has been contested ever since it was first proposed as an eastern bypass to parallel Interstate 35. With Proposition 4, county commissioners are asking Travis County voters to approve $66 million for right of way for the proposed toll road. Combined with $24 million already devoted to the project, the county is set to pay for half of the $180 million needed for right of way. "With that, we'll be in a position to approach the state and say, `Here's what we can do,' " County Judge Sam Biscoe said. But it might not be enough to appease the state, which wants the county to pay the full cost of right of way acquisition.

Joe Gieselman, Travis County's director of transportation and natural resources, says that a county typically would pay 10 percent to 30 percent of right of way costs for its section of a state highway. But he says there are no such rules of thumb for toll roads. The state argues that Travis County has already signed an agreement to pay 100 percent of the right-of-way costs. Travis County did make such a commitment in the early 1990s, when the proposed eastern bypass was known as the MoKan or Katy Expressway. State officials say that the earlier commitment extends to the Texas 130 project; county commissioners argue that the projects are different. County Commissioner Todd Baxter said Texas 130 "would have a different corridor, a different name and a different cost. It's also a toll road, and MoKan wasn't, but we need to find a way to work together in order to get the project done. We think this is a fair compromise." Commissioners long have complained that the price tag for the project continues to change and now is nearly $200 million.

Other Central Texas counties share similar concerns. "We're not against progress, but we are against bankruptcy," Caldwell County Judge H.D. Wright said. His county's $15 million portion is three times the county's annual budget, and Wright doesn't think Caldwell can afford it. Officials from the Texas Department of Transportation have stood firm from the beginning. "Given the mobility challenges of Central Texas, we plan to move forward with this project, and we expect the counties to uphold their end of the bargain," said Gaby Garcia, spokeswoman for department.

Less controversial in the Travis County bond package is Proposition 3, which would acquire right of way for Texas 45 and RM 1826 in southwestern Travis County. The county is asking for $32.7 million to combine with bonds passed in 1997 to widen RM 1826 between U.S. 290 and Slaughter Lane, and it would pave the way for a new Texas 45 in northern Travis County between Anderson Mill Road and FM 685. Despite the controversy over Texas 130, Travis County voters have always been receptive to building roads and highways. Every bond issuance for road projects since 1955 has passed comfortably.