Ronald Reagan Blvd tollway study prompts concerns from Wilco residents
The Brief
County commissioners approved resolution Tuesday for CTRMA traffic study of Ronald Reagan Boulevard
Williamson County Republican Party issued resolution opposing the study the following day
People present at Tuesday's meeting worry about a lack of public input on the study
WILLIAMSON COUNTY, Texas - Williamson County is moving forward with plans to consider building a tollway along Ronald Reagan Boulevard.
However, the plans are prompting concerns from residents and opposition from the county's Republican Party.
What we know
On Tuesday, Williamson County Commissioners unanimously approved a resolution asking the Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority to conduct a traffic study of Ronald Reagan Boulevard.
If approved, the CTRMA would pay for the construction of the tollway. It would transform Ronald Reagan into eight lanes on a 30-mile stretch. The project is broken into five segments and the county expects it to cost at least half a billion dollars.
The project would run from FM 1431 in Cedar Park to I-35 in Georgetown.
The CTRMA would also pay for construction and its upkeep, including the existing lanes on Ronald Reagan, which would remain toll-free.
Commissioners said they're considering the toll study because of growth.
What they're saying
"It is time to look for the future and acknowledging the congestion we have now and the increasing congestion we will have and ask them to begin their studies," said Williamson County's Sr. Director of Infrastructure Bob Daigh in commissioners court Tuesday.
"Because we need more information and I think this is the next step to figure out what our funding alternatives are, I will move to approve the adoption of the resolution on item number 72," said Commissioner Cynthia Long.
Dig deeper
The county also recently asked cities in the project's pathway to approve a feasibility study with the CTRMA, which will tell them if a tollway along Ronald Reagan is even possible.
Cedar Park City Council gave the county the greenlight, but Leander tabled the conversation until they could get more of their questions answered.
The other side
The day after the Commissioners Court vote, the Williamson County Republican Party issued its resolution opposing the study.
"It is a legislative priority that we want to speak out against these roads," said precinct chair Marcia Strickler Watson.
"Yes, we would have a choice not to be on the toll, we can go on the feeder road," added Strickler Watson. "We can take the red lights, we can do the things many are doing on 183-A, but why on earth would we need a whole other one less than a mile away parallel with what we already have?"
The resolution cites Gov. Greg Abbott and Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, who in 2017 told the state to reduce its reliance on tolls.
The resolution also took aim at CTRMA, claiming it has been "plagued with complaints from Texans about 'surprise billing,' poor customer service, and levying unsubstantiated financial penalties, including improperly billing disabled veterans and freezing their ability to renew their vehicle registration."
7 ON YOUR SIDE: Leander man's car registration blocked due to $1,600 of unpaid tolls
Read the Williamson County Republican Party's full resolution below:
Click to open this PDF in a new window.
What they're saying
However, the county says it's taking direction from the federal government.
"One of the things he emphasized in his policy was that state and local governments need to look at user-pay models," said Long. "We are following instructions from the secretary of transportation."
Local perspective
Others present at Commissioners Court on Tuesday were worried about a lack of public input on the study.
"I think a lot of us just feel like things happen without our input, and when we do give input it doesn't matter," said Angela Wetuski, who was opposed to the county moving forward with the toll road study. "All four commissioners shared that they had a lot of emails about this issue before their meeting, but they still rose their hands and voted yes for it, and so that kind of feels like a slap in the face."
During court, one Ronald Reagan driver testified to the traffic she sees regularly and encouraged the county to do the study.
"I look at the folks sitting on Ronald Reagan when I get to 2243 at Ronald Reagan, I can look up the hill and see them past Crystal Falls Parkway," said Rachel Arnold. "That is a mile and a half of traffic."
What's next
Several other speakers asked for a town hall, which was not something commissioners ruled out.
There is no funding for the construction right now, and CTRMA will be paying for the study.
Commissioners were not available for an interview because of the holiday.
The Source
Information in this report comes from reporting/interviews by FOX 7 Austin's Williamson County reporter Lauren Rangel, Williamson County and previous reporting.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - Trump-Musk divorce threatens the president and the entire Republican Party
Few expected the relationship between President Trump and Elon Musk to survive four years, but the spectacular collapse of this partnership has shocked even seasoned observers with its speed and intensity. Now, as two of the world's most powerful men openly clash, there are seismic implications for the country as a whole and the Republican Party specifically. Put another way, not only does this fissure expose cracks in the GOP and MAGA coalition, it's also a considerable threat to Republicans' midterms hopes and Trump's signature legislation. The fight, which began two weeks ago when Musk expressed 'disappointment' with Trump's 'one big, beautiful' bill had initially been confined to disagreements over the legislation, rather than personal attacks. Then, on Thursday afternoon, it escalated in unprecedented, dramatic fashion. Following Trump's recent comment that he would have won Pennsylvania without Musk's help, Musk replied 'Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate.' That was just Musk's opening salvo against the man he spent roughly $300 million to get elected. The tech billionaire then went on a blistering war path. He claimed Trump was on 'the Epstein list,' supported impeachment — a touchy subject for the twice-impeached Trump — and claimed that tariffs would cause a recession. Not content with attacking Trump, Musk has also threatened to fund primary challenges to Republicans who support the bill, and has criticized both Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-La.). With unprecedented speed, Musk went from the man who could pour hundreds of millions into Republican coffers to Republicans' enemy number one. Influential commentator Steve Bannon pushed for Musk's deportation, claiming he's an illegal alien, and Trump threatened to cancel all government contracts with Musk's multiple companies, saying Musk 'went CRAZY.' Whether or not the rumors of an impending détente between the two is enough to heal the rupture remains to be seen, but it's unlikely that all of the pieces will ever get put back together. Given Musk's deep pockets and control of social media platform X, where he has a cult-like following, Trump and the Republicans now find themselves in a treacherous spot at a precarious time. Indeed, even before the dramatic escalation, Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' was in limbo in the Senate. As Alexander Bolton noted in this publication prior to Thursday's blowup, Trump's bill is 'losing momentum in the Senate in the face of blistering attacks from Elon Musk.' To that end, Musk's criticisms of the bill and threats to primary its Republican supporters has already led two House Republicans who voted for the bill, Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) and John Rose (R-Tenn.), to come out against some of it. It appears that this fight has brought some Republicans back into Trump's fold. Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), who had been opposed to the bill prior to its passage in the House, condemned Musk, saying he 'crossed the line.' And Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn), another House conservative, dismissed Musk's influence, saying he is 'just another shiny object.' For their part, Republican senators who may have had doubts about Trump's signature legislation now risk being seen as taking Musk's side and being disloyal to the president. However, it would be a mistake to overlook the implications of the breakup or the dangers for Republicans. If he wants, Musk could very easily fund primaries against vulnerable GOP House members, and his control of X gives him unprecedented influence over the media ecosystem. Further, Musk's influence among the Silicon Valley cohort that moved stridently to the right in 2024 could peel off a new group of Republican voters and donors. In that same vein, there are possible electoral consequences for Republicans, even if tempers between Trump and Musk cool down. Trump was counting on the bill's passage to be a significant political tailwind that would boost his polling numbers and Republicans' midterm hopes, particularly given the ongoing chaos over tariffs and trade policy. Now, whichever version of the bill eventually passes, Republicans look like the party of chaos. It is entirely possible that this ongoing feud dents voters' confidence in Republicans' ability to competently govern, something Democrats are clearly hoping for. As the Wall Street Journal reported, Democrats are 'reveling' about the fight, with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) reposting Musk's attacks and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) taking digs at the 'GOP civil war.' To be sure, despite Musk's efforts, it remains likely that a version of Trump's 'one, big, beautiful bill' will still pass, but Republicans now have a bigger headache. Ultimately, divorces are always messy, but the Trump-Musk divorce is unprecedented, and it could not have come at a worse time for Republicans. With razor-thin margins in the House and the absence of Trump's much-touted trade bills, it poses the most significant threat to Republicans' midterm hopes, and by extension, the rest of Trump's term. Douglas E. Schoen and Carly Cooperman are pollsters and partners with the public opinion company Schoen Cooperman Research based in New York. They are co-authors of the book, 'America: Unite or Die.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Trump directs a new threat at Elon Musk, with an eye toward the 2026 midterm elections
As Donald Trump's relationship with Elon Musk imploded last week, the president and his top campaign donor didn't just throw random rhetorical punches. Their feud included rather specific threats. In fact, on Thursday afternoon, in the midst of an online volley, Trump wrote, 'The easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions and Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts.' At least so far, there's been no White House follow-through on this, and for the most part, the intensity of the conflict appears to have subsided. But it was against this backdrop that the president spoke to 'Meet the Press' host Kristen Welker by phone over the weekend and added a fresh threat to the conversation. NBC News reported: President Donald Trump on Saturday said there would be 'serious consequences' if tech mogul Elon Musk funds Democratic candidates to run against Republicans who vote in favor of the GOP's sweeping budget bill. When Welker asked, 'Are you concerned that Elon Musk could start funding Democratic candidates?' the president responded, 'If he does, he'll have to pay the consequences for that.' Pressed for details as to what that might entail, the Republican added, 'I'm not going to say, but he'll have to pay very serious consequences if he does that.' As a practical matter, it was easy to understand why Trump might be concerned about this. Last fall, Musk was the Republican Party's most important megadonor. Indeed, The Washington Post reported earlier this year that, based on the final available tally, the billionaire spent at least $288 million to help elect Trump and other Republican candidates in the 2024 cycle. It stands to reason that the party would welcome similar investments in the 2026 midterm elections, though last week, while complaining about the GOP's domestic policy megabill — the inaptly named 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' — Musk wrote, 'In November next year, we fire all politicians who betrayed the American people.' This led to a related social media item in which Musk added, 'A new political party is needed in America to represent the 80% in the middle! ... This is Fate.' While there's obviously all kinds of time between now and Election Day 2026, this did not sound like a billionaire ready to write generous checks to his erstwhile Republican allies. But there's a more important dimension to all of this: Politicians, at least in this in country, do not generally warn private citizens — out loud, in public, on the record — that they'll be punished for contributing to a different party. In fact, I honestly can't think of a comparable example to this. Trump is a sitting president, effectively telling his top campaign donor that he's prepared to use the power of his office to impose 'very serious consequences' on his former ally if Musk dares to support candidates the Republican doesn't like. Under normal circumstances, and in a healthy political environment, a threat like this one would itself constitute a significant political controversy. This article was originally published on
The Hill
2 hours ago
- The Hill
Trump and Vance are hanging out with conspiracy theorists and kooks
President Lincoln had a team of rivals. President Trump has a team of conspiracy mongers. Do you remember when Republicans raised holy hell about the people around President Obama? They obsessed over Jeremiah Wright, his former pastor, who made inflammatory statements about race. How many conservative media segments fixated on Bill Ayers, formerly of the Weather Underground, claiming Obama 'kicked off his political career in the guy's living room?' In today's Trump-led Republican Party, there is a far more alarming cast of characters firmly in the mainstream of Trump's power. Here is a look at the views of some eye-opening players exercising actual power and making actual policy in the Trump administration. Elon Musk: Last week, Musk's alliance with Trump blew up in a memorable episode of social media back-stabbing worthy of a reality television show. The clash left them both bloodied. But before the personal drama, Musk left a trail of human wounds, fear and confusion with his erratic, reckless firing of tens of thousands of federal workers as well as devil-may-care spending cuts throughout the federal government. And according to the New York Times, Musk was regularly taking drugs during last year's campaign, in which he was the president's top donor. This led one Democratic lawmaker to question whether Musk was regularly taking drugs as a special government employee this year. Trump allowed the unelected Musk to swing a metaphorical chainsaw — he actually did wield a literal one on stage — at government agencies and their workers. Some of those cuts, particularly to the U.S. Agency for International Development, have canceled vital medical treatment, resulting in needless suffering and death. Now, Trump is attacking Musk for condemning his tax and spending bill. Somehow, there is no condemnation of Trump for granting Musk's team access to private information about Americans from government computers. Imagine the explosion in the right-wing echo chamber if Rev. Wright had done anything close to that in the Obama years. Laura Loomer: Last week, the conspiracy theorist and proud podcasting provocateur was spotted meeting one-on-one with Vice President JD Vance at the White House complex. As The Hill reported, this was a repeat visit to the White House grounds, as Loomer met earlier this year with Trump in the Oval Office to raise concerns about certain National Security Council staffers. They were soon fired. When Loomer is in the White House, she brings with her quite a history, including reports that she described herself as a 'white advocate' as well as having posted a video online claiming that the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the U.S. were 'an inside job.' Loomer is also a leading voice pushing the conspiracy theory suggesting that U.S. law enforcement agencies knew in advance about several mass school shootings and allowed them to happen to help Democrats win elections in order to enact gun control. In thinking about Loomer having access to the president and vice president, an old saying comes to mind: We are the average of the people we spend the most time with. Curtis Yarvin: A leading influence on Vance, Yarvin has called for replacing American democracy with a 'monarch.' His proposals include calls to 'retire all government employees' and, in one especially grotesque idea, he proposed a racial hierarchy to 'put the church Blacks in charge of the ghetto Blacks.' As the New Yorker put it in a profile, Yarvin advocates 'the liquidation of democracy, the Constitution, and the rule of law,' and the transfer of power to a CEO-in-chief (such as Steve Jobs or Marc Andreessen) who would transform government into 'a heavily armed, ultra-profitable corporation.' This regime would sell off public schools, destroy universities, abolish the press and imprison 'decivilized populations.' Odd characters are nothing new in politics. But Trump's second term stands out for putting provocateurs into positions of authority. This starts with the president. Just last week, Trump, on his personal social media platform, called attention to a bizarre claim that President Biden is dead, having been executed in 2020 and his power taken over by an imposter, a 'soulless mindless' robot. And, of course, Trump relentlessly promoted the 'birther' conspiracy theory about Obama — that he had been secretly born abroad — more than a decade ago. Trump's willingness to grab attention by embracing conspiracy theories recently backfired. His critics are taking great delight in the right-wing echo chamber's backlash against Attorney General Pam Bondi, FBI Director Kash Patel and FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino. They are being castigated by Trump loyalists for failing to unearth any evidence of a conspiracy by elites to kill Jeffrey Epstein. After years of being primed with conspiracy theories, Trump supporters reacted angrily to Patel and Bongino's conclusion that Epstein killed himself in prison and no one else was involved. This brand of conspiracy thinking is in line with the energy that fueled the Proud Boys' attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. It fits with Trump's repeated lie that the 2020 election was stolen. It is in line with the 'Great Replacement Theory' — that Jewish elites are importing brown-skinned immigrants to replace the white working class and the chants of white supremacists in their Charlottesville rally during Trump's first term: 'Jews will not replace us.' And it keeps going. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) recently promised to hold Senate hearings based on 9/11 conspiracy theories. 'What actually happened on 9/11? What do we know? What is being covered up?' Johnson said on a MAGA podcast appearance. 'My guess is there's an awful lot being covered up, in terms of what the American government knows about 9/11.' Johnson isn't alone. House Republicans have pledged to reopen investigations into everything from the JFK assassination to the existence of UFOs. I knew William F. Buckley Jr. a bit — from television, from D.C. and from his days as editor of National Review. He fearlessly called out the excesses of his own movement, particularly the conspiracy mongers in the far-right John Birch Society. Where is the Buckley of today? Juan Williams is senior political analyst for Fox News Channel and a prize-winning civil rights historian. He is the author of the new book 'New Prize for These Eyes: The Rise of America's Second Civil Rights Movement.'
