09-16-2025 Council Workshop Agenda Packet
COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING AGENDA
City Council
September 16, 2025
5:00 P.M.
HAL BALDWIN MUNICIPAL COMPLEX COUNCIL CHAMBERS
1400 SCHERTZ PARKWAY BUILDING #4
SCHERTZ, TEXAS 78154
CITY OF SCHERTZ CORE VALUES
Do the right thing
Do the best you can
Treat others the way you want to be treated
Work cooperatively as a team
AGENDA
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 2025 at 5:00 p.m.
Call to Order
Hearing of Residents
This time is set aside for any person who wishes to address the City Council. Each person should fill
out the speaker’s register prior to the meeting. Presentations should be limited to no more than 3
minutes.
All remarks shall be addressed to the Council as a body, and not to any individual member thereof.
Any person making personal, impertinent, or slanderous remarks while addressing the Council may
be requested to leave the meeting.
All handouts and/or USB devices must be submitted to the City Secretary no later than noon on the
Monday preceding the meeting. Handouts will be provided to each Councilmember prior to the start
of the meeting by the City Secretary. All USB devices will be vetted by City IT staff to ensure City
property is protected from malware.
Discussion by the Council of any item not on the agenda shall be limited to statements of specific
factual information given in response to any inquiry, a recitation of existing policy in response to an
inquiry, and/or a proposal to place the item on a future agenda. The presiding officer, during the
Hearing of Residents portion of the agenda, will call on those persons who have signed up to speak in
the order they have registered.
September 16, 2025 City Council Agenda Page 1
Discussion and Action Items
1.Join the American Flood Coalition (Councilmember Heyward)
2.Join Coalition Against Bigger Truck (Councilmember Heyward)
Adjournment
CERTIFICATION
I, SHEILA EDMONDSON, CITY SECRETARY OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS, DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT
THE ABOVE AGENDA WAS PREPARED AND POSTED ON THE OFFICIAL BULLETIN BOARDS ON THIS THE
10TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025 AT 6:45 P.M., WHICH IS A PLACE READILY ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC
AT ALL TIMES AND THAT SAID NOTICE WAS POSTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 551, TEXAS
GOVERNMENT CODE.
SHEILA EDMONDSON
I CERTIFY THAT THE ATTACHED NOTICE AND AGENDA OF ITEMS TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE
CITY COUNCIL WAS REMOVED BY ME FROM THE OFFICIAL BULLETIN BOARD ON ________DAY OF
___________________, 2025.
TITLE: _______________________________
This facility is accessible in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Handicapped parking spaces are
available. If you require special assistance or have a request for sign interpretative services or other services, please call
210-619-1030.
The City Council for the City of Schertz reserves the right to adjourn into closed session at any time during the
course of this meeting to discuss any of the matters listed above, as authorized by the Texas Open Meetings Act.
Closed Sessions Authorized: This agenda has been reviewed and approved by the City’s legal counsel and the
presence of any subject in any Closed Session portion of the agenda constitutes a written interpretation of Texas
Government Code Chapter 551 by legal counsel for the governmental body and constitutes an opinion by the
attorney that the items discussed therein may be legally discussed in the closed portion of the meeting considering
available opinions of a court of record and opinions of the Texas Attorney General known to the attorney. This
provision has been added to this agenda with the intent to meet all elements necessary to satisfy Texas Government
Code Chapter 551.144(c) and the meeting is conducted by all participants in reliance on this opinion.
September 16, 2025 City Council Agenda Page 2
Agenda No. 1.
CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM
City Council Meeting:September 16, 2025
Department:City Secretary
Subject:Join the American Flood Coalition (Councilmember Heyward)
BACKGROUND
What is the American Flood Coalition? The American Flood Coalition is a nonpartisan Section
501(c)(3) nonprofit organization that brings together elected officials, cities and counties, military
groups, businesses, local leaders, and civic groups to advance national solutions that support
flood-affected communities and protect our nation’s residents, economy, and military installations.
Attachments
What is American Flood Coalition
AFCA Key Items
What is the American Flood Coalition?
The American Flood Coalition is a nonpartisan Section 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization that brings
together elected officials, cities and counties, military groups, businesses, local leaders, and civic
groups to advance national solutions that support flood-affected communities and protect our
nation’s residents, economy, and military installations.
What is the goal of the American Flood Coalition?
The American Flood Coalition advocates for policy changes and practical national
solutions to address the issues posed by rising seas and flooding. We support policies that
strengthen our economy, invest in our communities, and safeguard our national security. With
effective planning, our flood-affected communities can adapt and thrive. By investing in planning
and projects to proactively address flooding and sea level rise, we can protect our ports, highways,
runways, businesses, schools, and homes while creating jobs and economic opportunities in our
local communities.
Is the American Flood Coalition only focused on flooding and sea level rise?
Yes – flooding and sea level rise are serious and immediate issues that affect our communities and
the hundreds of millions of Americans who live there each day.
What is the American Flood Coalition’s platform?
We support policies that impact four key areas:
● Economy: Investing in infrastructure and natural solutions that boost the economy and
protect property values by creating dedicated federal funding and incentives for resilience.
● Communities: Using smart planning to keep communities safe and save taxpayer
dollars by expanding pre-disaster mitigation programs and adopting resilient standards for
federal spending.
● Rebuilding: Rebuilding our communities with a clear-eyed view of future risk to protect them
from future flooding.
● Military: Ensuring readiness 365 days a year by giving the military the authority to
assess and address the impact of flooding on- and off-base.
Who is the American Flood Coalition?
Our coalition includes elected officials, military groups, towns, cities and counties, nonprofit
organizations, businesses, and local leaders. We have a full list at this link.
Why are flooding and sea level rise urgent issues right now?
Flooding and sea level rise are urgent because 126 million Americansi are at risk. 1 in 8
Americans live within a100-year floodplain, despite FEMA’s flood maps estimating only 1 in 25
Americans are at risk.ii 53 mission-critical basesiii and 37 major portsiv across the nation are also
directly vulnerable. Here’s what we know:
● Proactive solutions save money: Every $1 spent on pre-disaster mitigation saves up to
$7 in disaster relief.v This not only protects communities, but ensures we are faithful
stewards of the taxpayer’s money.
● It’s a major economic issue: Crucial regional and national economic drivers - ports,
tourism and hospitality industries, and real estate, among others - are under siege from
flooding and sea level rise. These impacts extend far beyond the boundaries of individual
flood-impacted communities.
• It’s a national security issue: 53 mission-critical Navy, Army, and Air Force bases are
currently vulnerable to sea level rise, leading to recurrent “sunny-day” flooding and reducing
our military readiness.vi For example, flooding in Virginia impacts the access road to Norfolk
Naval Base about 10 times a year.vii
What makes the American Flood Coalition unique?
The American Flood Coalition is unique because of its laser-focus on flooding and sea level rise
and how its diverse, nonpartisan coalition works together to advocate for solutions and national
policies to protect our communities. No other organization brings together this range of different
organizations, cities, and individuals who are collectively advocating for solutions that address
flooding at the national level.
Are there any costs or legal obligations to joining the American Flood Coalition?
No, there are not. Membership is entirely informal, costs nothing, and does not create any legal
ties or obligations. As a result, any member is free to withdraw at any time.
Does the American Flood Coalition hold annual conferences?
Not at this time, but we do arrange events in Washington, D.C. and in multiple regions across the
country.
How is the American Flood Coalition funded?
The American Flood Coalition is a nonpartisan Section 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization that is
supported by philanthropic funding, including funding from multiple family foundations and
institutional funders. The Coalition does not and has not ever received funding from the general
public or from corporate sources. We comply with all public financial disclosure and transparency
laws governing Section 501(c)(3) organizations.
Do you take on controversial issues/what if I disagree with your policy choices?
Our policy platform is a broad set of principles and goals that each member agrees to when
they join the coalition. This platform is designed to focus on areas of common interest across our
diverse membership. Coalition support for a particular policy or unique piece of legislation does not
imply the endorsement of the individual members of the Coalition. Likewise, if an individual
member of the Coalition voices support for a particular policy or piece of legislation, such support
does not imply endorsement of the Coalition.
Who do I contact with additional questions about the American Flood Coalition?
Send an email to info@floodcoalition.org, and a member of our team will be happy to address your
question.
i NOAA, 2015
ii CityLab and YaleEnvironment, 2018
iii U.S. Department of Defense, 2019
iv JOC Container Shipping and Trade News, 2019
v Pew Research Center, 2019
vi U.S Department of Defense, 2019
vii National Geographic, 2017
Key Federal Policy Priorities advocated by American Flood Coalition
Action as well as Flood Finder tool.
Key AFCA federal policy priorities included in House Transportation & Infrastructure
Committee bipartisan FEMA reform bill.
Key federal priorities advocated for by American Flood Coalition Action (AFCA), the
advocacy arm of AFC, are included in the House Transportation and Infrastructure (T&I)
Committee bipartisan Fixing Emergency Management for Americans (FEMA) Act. The
legislation makes significant reforms to FEMA, including: Upfront funding: Communities
will now receive project-based grants to rebuild infrastructure faster, rather than waiting
years for reimbursement which strains local budgets.
Modernized processes: Practical reforms that open the door for innovative tech like drones
and satellites in damage assessment. Less red tape: The legislation takes steps to simplify
burdensome and duplicative processes, helping communities and individuals recover
without navigating a maze of rules and time-consuming applications. One-stop application
portal: A universal application will replace the current patchwork of forms, a game-
changer for disaster survivors.
Clear denial and appeal process: Disaster survivors will now receive plain-language
decisions, making it easier to understand and navigate appeals. Strengthening
communities’ ability to prepare for disasters: The legislation reforms the BRIC program to
provide more flexibility to states to determine how to spend funds.
AFCA federal priority to permanently authorize the CDBG-DR
program advanced by Senate Banking Committee
AFCA federal policy priority of permanent authorization of CDBG-DR was advanced this
month by the Senate Banking Committee. Permanent authorization means states and
communities will have a consistent, streamlined funding program for long-term recovery
across disasters. It will speed up recovery, reduce bureaucracy, and help communities
rebuild stronger and faster. When disasters strike, local leaders don’t have time for
bureaucracy when their towns are underwater or their schools are closed. They need clear
answers, fast funding, and fewer obstacles. This bipartisan legislation is a powerful step in
that direction.
Another longtime federal priority of AFCA, the universal disaster assistance application for
survivors, was unanimously advanced by the Senate Homeland Security and Government
Affairs Committee (HSGAC). The Disaster Assistance Simplification Act is a major step
toward delivering faster, more effective disaster relief to survivors across the country.
One universal application for federal disaster aid
Simplified access across agencies
Streamlined recovery for disaster survivors
Applying for aid after a disaster is a time-consuming and complicated process, since
individuals must fill out separate applications for each federal agency assisting in
recovery, even though these applications are often duplicative and require the same
information. By creating a universal application, the bill would help to reduce the burden
on disaster survivors by making the process simpler, faster, and more accessible
The easiest way to find federal funds for flooding
Informed by our members, AFC’s Flood Funding Finder is a free online tool that
makes it easy to find federal grants that support flood resilience — and to filter for
programs that best fit communities’ needs.
To create this interactive website, we analyzed hundreds of programs across
dozens of federal agencies to identify 30 federal funding opportunities that help
communities address flooding.
With the Flood Funding Finder, you can…
Learn about application deadlines and key information.
See examples of successfully funded flood projects.
Read short summaries of federal programs.
5 additional programs for transportation and nature-based
solutions
We added five programs to the Flood Funding Finder. These programs support state and
locally led flood-resilient transportation projects and planning, as well as cost-effective
nature-based solutions that enhance ecosystem health and recreation, while reducing
impacts from flooding.
You can find these programs on the Flood Funding Finder, or by clicking the links below.
National Highway Performance Program (DOT FHWA)
The National Highway Performance Program provides funds to states to raise or relocate
roadways, stabilize slopes, improve drainage, and use nature-based solutions to reduce
flood risk to the National Highway System.
Promoting Resilient Operations for Transformative, Efficient, and
Cost-saving Transportation Program (DOT FHWA)
The PROTECT program supports both planning and implementation activities to make
transportation infrastructure, evacuation routes, and coastal infrastructure more resilient to
flooding. Deadline: February 24, 2025.
National Fish Passage Program (DOI FWS)
The National Fish Passage Program helps reduce flood risk and supports fish passage by
restoring floodplains and wetlands, removing barriers like dams, and upgrading culverts.
Deadlines: December 31, 2024, for FY2024 funds; September 30, 2025, for FY2025
funds.
Sewer Overflow and Stormwater Reuse Municipal Grants Program
(EPA)
The Sewer Overflow and Stormwater Reuse Municipal Grants Program funds green and
gray infrastructure projects that strengthen stormwater collection, improve flood resilience,
and address water quality problems.
Emergency Watershed Protection and EWP Floodplain Easement
Programs (USDA NRCS)
The Emergency Watershed Protection Program is a disaster recovery program that can be
used to remove debris, protect eroded streambanks, fix damaged drainage infrastructure,
and purchase floodplain easements to restore land to its natural state
Agenda No. 2.
CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM
City Council Meeting:September 16, 2025
Department:City Secretary
Subject:Join Coalition Against Bigger Truck (Councilmember Heyward)
BACKGROUND
A LEADING VOICE FOR HIGHWAY SAFETY
Coalition Against Bigger Trucks (CABT) is a national, nonprofit grassroots organization that
advocates for highway safety and sound transportation policies.
Attachments
About CABT
CABT White Paper on Bigger Trucks
CABT Longer Trucks
Heavier Log Truck Research
AT Risk Bridges
Lobbiest for Heavier Trucks
Sample Resolution
About CABT ( Coalition Against Bigger Trucks
A LEADING VOICE FOR HIGHWAY SAFETY
Coalition Against Bigger Trucks (CABT) is a national, nonprofit grassroots organization that
advocates for highway safety and sound transportation policies.
Since Semitrailer trucks play a vital role in the U.S. economy and transportation system,
but longer, heavier trucks endanger motorists, weaken our roads and bridges, and cost
taxpayers billions of dollars every year in highway subsidies. A leading voice in opposing
more dangerous truck configurations, the Coalition Against Bigger Trucks (CABT) is a
national, nonprofit grassroots organization that has advocated for highway safety and
sound transportation policies since 1995.
Stand with over 4,000 law enforcement officers, EMTs, safety leaders, engineers,
independent truck drivers and elected officials, and voice your opposition to bigger trucks
on our nation’s highways.
Are we willing to compromise the safety of thousands of motorists every day just to haul
more freight? Are we willing to spend billions to repair bridges damaged by bigger trucks?
Who will pay the price for an 11-percent higher fatal crash rate for multi-trailer trucks? Who
will pick up the tab when bigger trucks only repay a portion of their highway damage?
Polls show that voters oppose bigger trucks, but Congress and state legislatures across
the country are debating this issue right now. Surveys found that 95 percent of law
enforcement officers believe heavier and longer trucks would be more dangerous, and 88
percent of truck drivers believe greater use of longer combination vehicles would
negatively impact highway safety.
Proposals in Congress and state legislatures would increase the truck weight limits—and
other proposals call for longer double-trailer trucks and triple-trailer trucks.
1
Heavier Truck “Pilot Project” Proposals Turns Motorists into Guinea Pigs
Prepared by CABT, April 2025
Certain business interests are lobbying legislation that would create a “pilot project” (H.R. 3372 in the 118th
Congress) to allow any state to increase truck weights from 80,000 pounds to 91,000 pounds for up to 10 years
on its interstates. In the last Congress, this proposal passed the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee,
yet failed to make it to the House floor. The goal, according to the legislation: to track crashes involving these
heavier trucks, including injuries and fatalities. This does nothing more than turn interstates into test tracks
and motorists into guinea pigs.
As the Virginia Department of Transportation stated when analyzing potential involvement in a pilot project:
“Safety must remain a primary consideration. Increases in crash rates among the heavier trucks could occur
and although a decrease in safety would be a trigger for discontinuation of the pilot, any injuries or loss of life
resulting from the pilot would be unacceptable.”
(Virginia Department of Transportation, 2018)
In 2016, the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) delivered its three-year Comprehensive Truck Size
and Weight Limits Study Report requested by Congress. That report found that heavier trucks had serious
safety problems and would impose additional costs on our highway infrastructure. The Department
recommended that Congress not approve any heavier trucks.1
“Pilot Project” for Heavier Trucks Means Experimenting with Motorists
A “pilot project” for heavier trucks is misguided and dangerous because of the threat to public safety and
damage to infrastructure. So-called “pilot projects” amount to little more than experimenting with heavier
trucks on public roads and bridges with motorists. The information sought includes the number of crashes,
including injuries and fatalities involving heavier trucks. USDOT and the Transportation Research Board (TRB)
have recommended better ways of obtaining this information without further endangering motorists or
damaging our infrastructure.
Previous research shows a heavier truck is a more dangerous truck
After reviewing decades of safety research, there do not appear to be any studies that say a heavier truck is a
safer truck. On the contrary, numerous studies have found increased danger. Along with the most recent
studies from USDOT, VDOT and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, other studies have found increased
risks to public safety. These include reports from the Wisconsin Department of Transportation,2 the
Transportation Research Board,3 and the University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute.4 Given
these concerns, additional data should not be collected using methods that put lives at stake.
Heavier Trucks Are More Dangerous Trucks
More crashes. 91,000-pound, six axle trucks had a 47 percent higher crash rate than 80,000-pound, five axle
trucks in limited state testing. 97,000-pound trucks had even higher crash rates, from 99-400 percent higher
than 80,000-pound, five axle trucks.5:
1 USDOT; 2016. Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Limits Study, Final Report to Congress
2 National Center for Freight & Infrastructure Research and Engineering; 2009. Wisconsin Truck Size and Weight Study
3 Transportation Research Board; 1990. Truck Weight Limits: Issues and Options
4 University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute; 1988. Analysis of Accident Rates of Heavy Duty Vehicles.
5 USDOT; 2016. Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Limits Study, Final Report to Congress
2
More severe crashes. The severity of a crash is determined by the velocity and mass of a vehicle. If its weight
increases, so does the potential severity of a crash. Any increase in crash severity increases the likelihood of
injuries becoming more serious or resulting in fatalities.
More likely to roll over. Heavier trucks tend to have a higher center of gravity because the additional weight is
often stacked vertically. Raising the center of gravity increases the risk of rollovers.6
Increased wear and tear. Increasing the weight of trucks causes additional wear and tear on key safety
components. The 2016 USDOT study found that trucks weighing over 80,000 pounds had higher overall out-of-
service (OOS) rates and 18 percent higher brake violation rates compared to those at or below 80,000
pounds.7 This is especially important because a 2016 study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety found
that trucks with any out-of-service violation are 362 percent more likely to be involved in a crash.8
Heavier Trucks Would Cause Significant Infrastructure Damage
Bridges don’t care about axles – bridge damage is a function of gross vehicle weight. The USDOT study
examined interstate and US highway bridges and found thousands of structures that would have to be
repaired or replaced to accommodate 91,000-pound trucks. A recent report that evaluated local bridges the
USDOT did not examine found more than 68,000 bridges that are not rated to safely handle 91,000-pound
trucks. These bridges would cost $78.7 billion to replace, leaving taxpayers to foot the bill.9
Heavier interstate weight limits will not take trucks off of local roads
No truck trip begins or ends on the interstate system. These trucks would operate on all roadways. In fact, 44%
of truck traffic operates off the interstates today.10 The vast majority of state laws allowing heavier trucks on
local roads will not conform with a 91,000-pound, six axle pilot program, meaning a pilot program will do
nothing to take heavier trucks off of local roads. In fact, this pilot project will increase pressure on state
legislatures to increase truck weight limits on local roads, creating serious safety and infrastructure problems.
A Safe Alternative
If proponents are serious about collecting more comprehensive information about the impacts of heavier
trucks, they should support the comprehensive research plans initiated by USDOT11 and TRB.12 Conducting test
track operations of bigger trucks and improving the collection of crash and travel data in the states where
heavier trucks already operate is the logical next step as opposed to expanding the operation and increasing
the dangers. Specific recommendations include the following:
• Reinstitute and expand the collection of higher-quality, impartial data nationwide (i.e., TIFA and VIUS),
including VMT, and implement a uniform crash report form that accurately collects the number of
trailers and axles, truck weight and length, and road type where the crash occurred.
• Collect and analyze data on the impacts of bigger-truck operations on local roads and bridges.
• Conduct operational tests of bigger-truck configurations at track testing facilities, fully evaluating
vehicle dynamics in real-world conditions.
6 USDOT; 2000. Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Study
7 USDOT; 2016. Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Limits Study, Final Report to Congress
8 Insurance Institute for Highway Safety; 2016. Crash Risk Factors for Interstate Large Trucks in North Carolina
9 Bailey, Harvill et al; 2025. The Impacts of Heavier Trucks on Local Bridges: 2025 Update
10 Bureau of Transportation Statistics; 2023. Vehicle Miles Traveled by Highway Category and Vehicle Type
11 Ibid
12 Transportation Research Board; 2019. Research to Support Evaluation of Truck Size and Weight Regulations
1
Longer Double-Trailer Trucks Endanger Motorists and Damage Infrastructure
Prepared by CABT, January 2025
A few large trucking companies are pushing Congress to force states to allow longer double-trailer
trucks, or “Double 33s.” These longer double-trailer trucks would replace not only today’s shorter, 28-
foot double-trailer trucks, but also many 53-foot single-trailer trucks that commonly operate on the road
today. Longer double-trailer trucks would add new dangers for motorists and damage our infrastructure.
Double 33s are 91 feet in length—that is 10 feet longer than the current doubles they are intended to
replace and 17 feet longer than current single-trailer trucks. In 2015, Congress rejected these longer
double-trailer trucks,1 and the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT), in its 2016
Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Limits Study, recommended that Congress not approve these or
any other longer or heavier trucks.2
Double 33s Would Replace Single-Trailer Trucks
Double-trailer trucks represent a relatively small percentage of trucks operating on our roads today. The
majority of combination trucks in operation are 53 foot single-trailer trucks. If Congress requires states
to allow the longer doubles, today’s truck traffic would change dramatically. Since Double 33s have 24
percent more capacity than 53 foot trailers, market forces would push companies currently operating
single-trailer trucks to replace their fleets with Double 33s. According to a 2015 analysis, this would
incur a massive shift from single-trailer trucks to Double 33s, resulting in approximately 42 to 101 billion
additional miles of double-trailer truck travel on our nation’s highways.3
Longer Double-Trailer Trucks Would Add New Dangers to the Highways
An influx of double-trailer trucks on the highway would have severe safety implications for motorists.
Studies have consistently shown that multi-trailer trucks—doubles and triple-trailer trucks—are more
dangerous than single-trailer trucks. A 2013 Marshall University-led study4 found that double-trailer
trucks have an 11 percent higher fatality rate than single-trailer trucks. This result is consistent with
findings made by USDOT in a 2000 study.5 Below are several reasons these trucks are more dangerous:
1. Longer stopping distances. Double 33s take 252 feet to stop—that is a 17-foot longer stopping
distance than today’s single-trailer trucks and 22 feet longer than today’s twin-trailer trucks.6
1 On Nov. 10, 2015, the Senate rejected increasing the length of double-trailer trucks as part of the surface transportation
reauthorization bill on a 56-31 floor vote; and on Nov. 18, 2015, the U.S. Senate rejected increasing the length of double-trailer
trucks on the omnibus spending bill on a voice vote.
2 USDOT; 2016. Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Limits Study, Final Report to Congress.
3 Mingo, Roger D., and Mark L. Burton, Mark L.; 2015. Mandated Twin 33 Trailers Produce Costly Shifts in Freight Movement.
4 Marshall University, 2013. An Analysis of Truck Size and Weight: Phase I – Safety.
5 USDOT; 2000. Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Study.
6 USDOT; 2015. Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Limits Study, Highway Safety and Truck Crash Comparative Analysis
Technical Report.
2
2. Increased rollover propensity and rearward amplification. Double 33s experience increased rollover
vulnerability, poorer stability and a compromised ability to make avoidance maneuvers compared to
single-trailer trucks.7
3. More wear and tear. Double-trailer configurations have 58 percent higher out-of-service violation
rates than single-trailer trucks.8 This is especially important because a 2016 study by the Insurance
Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) found that trucks with any out-of-service violation are 362 percent
more likely to be involved in a crash.9
Double 33s Would Cause Significant Infrastructure Damage
According to the 2016 USDOT study, Double 33s would increase pavement damage by 1.8 percent to 2.7
percent,10 which translates to $1.2 to $1.8 billion in estimated pavement damage every year.11 This
does not include state, county and municipal roads, which are built to lower standards than federal
infrastructure.
Also, USDOT found that nearly 2,500 interstate and other National Highway System bridges would need
to be strengthened or replaced to handle the longer double-trailer trucks, costing taxpayers up to $1.1
billion.12 The study accounts for only 20 percent of bridges—the other 80 percent of bridges on state
and local roads would be more vulnerable to longer trucks.
Many Trucking Companies Oppose Double 33s
The Truckload Carriers Association (TCA), representing over 700 trucking companies, strongly opposes
longer double-trailer trucks. In fact, TCA wrote to Members of Congress in 2015 to express their
concerns over increasing the length of double-trailer trucks, stating that these trucks would increase
costs of delivering freight, decrease fuel efficiency, incur additional expenses to train or retrain drivers,
increase the potential for driver injuries while coupling and decoupling trailers, and exacerbate truck
parking problems.13
The Double 33s Mandate Would Override State Laws
This legislation would preempt state laws and require every state to allow longer double-trailer trucks
on their roads, even if they determined that their roadways were not capable of safely accommodating
the longer trucks or that they would damage their pavement and bridges.
Double 33s Are Heavier Than Today's Twin 28s
According to USDOT, Double 33s will, on average, be over four tons heavier than today’s Twin 28s due
to added capacity.14 Longer stopping distances, increased crash severity and increased pavement and
bridge damage of Double 33s are all negative impacts attributed to the additional weight.
7 Ibid.
8 Ibid.
9 Insurance Institute for Highway Safety; 2016. Crash Risk Factors for Interstate Large Trucks in North Carolina.
10 USDOT; 2015. Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Limits Study, Volume 1: Technical Reports Summary.
11 R.D. Mingo and Associates; 2015. Analysis of 2012 FHWA Highway Statistics and selected Cost Allocation studies.
12 Ibid.
13 Truckload Carriers Association; October 20, 2015. Letter to House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Bill
Shuster and Ranking Member Peter DeFazio.
14 USDOT; 2016. Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Limits Study, Final Report to Congress.
1
Heavier Log Truck Bill Would Endanger Motorists and Damage Infrastructure
Prepared by CABT, March 2025
H.R. 2166 and S. 1063 would dramatically expand the roads on which extra-heavy log trucks are
allowed to operate in at least 20 states. These bills would replace the current national uniform
interstate gross vehicle weight limit of 80,000 pounds with whatever each individual state
allows on its state roads. The new weight limits would vary by state and very few of the states
would have the same limits. The new limits would range from 84,000 pounds on five axles to
156,000 pounds on eight axles. There is nothing in the bill to address the dangers caused by the
extra weight like rollover risk and longer stopping distances. There is no requirement in the bill
for extra axles to mitigate the additional pavement damage caused by heavier trucks. Nothing is
provided to protect interstate bridges from the extra stress created by heavier trucks; in some
cases, even the Federal Bridge Formula would be violated.1
A patchwork approach to truck weight limits such as proposed in this legislation has been
consistently opposed by the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT)2 which recommended
in 2016 against any change in federal truck size and weight laws.3 The bill would also violate the
longstanding federal LCV freeze4 by allowing heavier, multi-trailer trucks on the interstates.
This bill would not get heavier trucks off local roads. No trip starts and stops on the interstate
highway, and with higher allowed weights, the log trucks that currently operate at the legal
limit of 80,000 pounds to utilize the interstate would run at the new, heavier weight. The end
result is a higher frequency of heavier trucks on all roads.
Heavy Log Trucks Increase Dangers
• Roll over. Log trucks experienced rollover in 21% of fatal crashes, nearly twice the
average for large trucks.5
• Older average age of vehicles. Log trucks had the oldest average age (17 years) of any
class of truck involved in fatal crashes compared to an average of 9.2 years for all
trucks.6
• Severe crashes. Log trucks are more likely to be involved in crashes resulting in fatalities
and injuries. In 2021, vehicles in log truck crashes were 68% more likely to be involved in
a fatality and 26% more likely to be involved in an injury when compared to crashes
involving other big trucks.7
1 FHWA; 2015. Compilation of Existing State Truck Size and Weight Limit Laws
2 U.S. Department of Transportation; 2004. Western Uniformity Scenario Analysis, pg. ES-11
3 U.S. Department of Transportation; 2016. Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Limits Final Report to Congress, pg. 21
4 23 CFR § 658.23
5 FMCSA. Analysis & Information Online- Crash Statistics. FARS Database 2021
6 Ibid
7 Ibid
2
• Longer stopping distances. Adding weight without additional braking capacity increases
stopping distance8, potentially turning a near-miss into a fatal crash.
Heavier Log Trucks Would Cause Significant Infrastructure Damage
• More weight on same number of axles. Many states would allow increased weights
without increasing the number of axles. Compared to an 80,000-pound truck, a vehicle
with a weight of 84,000 pounds increases pavement damage by 25%, while a 90,000 -
pound truck would do 73% more damage.9
• Interstate bridges are already in dire need of repair. Of the 147,439 bridges on the
National Highway System, over 56% are rated as being in fair or poor condition.10
Adding significantly heavier trucks, some of which would violate the Federal Bridge
Formula, would dramatically increase infrastructure damage.
• Taxpayers should not be forced to subsidize the logging industry. While logging
companies may increase their profits by operating heavier log trucks, taxpayers will be
forced to pick up the tab for the additional damage to roads and bridges caused by the
extra-heavy trucks.
Commodity-specific Piecemeal Approach Sets Bad Precedent
“I think it’s a strain on our roadways and it certainly opens the floodgates for every other
industry. I think they’d have a hard time holding the line to pass this for one specific
industry and not have others follow suit.”
Statement by Iowa county engineer Ben Hull, discussing a
bill to raise timber truck weights as reported in The Hawk
Eye, Burlington, IA, April 24, 2019
• Allowing one overweight commodity sets a bad precedent. Piecemeal legislation sets
the stage for future requests, where Congress is forced to favor or disadvantage specific
industries.
• Sets the stage for a nationwide increase. As more exemptions are passed, a more
complicated patchwork is created that would fuel calls for nationwide weight increases,
with devastating consequences for public safety and infrastructure.
8 U.S. Department of Transportation; 2015. Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Limits Study Highway Safety and Truck Crash
Comparative Analysis Technical Report, pg. 65
9 FHWA PaveDAT Model
10 FHWA; 2024. Bridge Condition by Highway System 2024
*Based on findings of The Impacts of Heavier Trucks on Local Bridges: 2025 Update. March, 2025
Number of local bridges put at risk by 91,000-pound trucks: 57
Cost of replacing at-risk local bridges: $40,800,995
Total number of local bridges: 447
At-risk bridges with highest daily truck traffic
County Route Carried Feature Crossed Age Condition Replacement Cost
Webb County SH 359 LOBO CREEK 101 Fair $485,341
McMullen County SH 16 FRIO RIVER 70 Poor $3,503,830
Atascosa County SH 16 DRAW 66 Fair $537,365
Jim Hogg County SH 16 MESQUITE CREEK 60 Good $449,624
Atascosa County US 281A ATASCOSA RIVER 99 Poor $1,710,251
Guadalupe County FM 725 LONG CREEK 54 Fair $529,838
Guadalupe County FM 725 DRAW 54 Good $708,870
McMullen County SH 16 Salt Branch 70 Good $421,702
McMullen County SH 16 San Miguel Creek 70 Poor $2,340,946
Duval County SH 44 DRAW 70 Fair $473,782
Duval County SH 16 DRAW 85 Fair $710,898
McMullen County SH 72 Draw 25 Fair $789,970
Bexar County LP 1604 Draw 41 Good $625,789
Bexar County LP 1604 Draw 44 Good $1,314,107
Bexar County LP 1604 Draw 43 Good $444,528
Texas 28th Congressional District
Bridge Report: 2025 Update
91,000 Pound Trucks
March, 2025
Proposed Bigger Truck Configurations
Prepared by CABT, January 2025
Longer Double Trailer Trucks
• FedEx, UPS, Amazon and a handful of other companies have lobbied for legislation that would force
states to allow double trailer trucks 91 feet in length, called “Double 33s,” on the federally
designated National Network, which includes 200,000 miles of roadways. These are 10 feet longer
than today’s twin trailers and 17 feet longer than standard single trailer trucks.
• Double 33s were rejected in the U.S. Senate in November of 2015 on a 56-31 vote.
• The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) determined in 2016 that Double 33s take 252 feet
to stop—22 feet longer than today’s twin trailer configuration.
• USDOT also found that Double 33s would result in the largest increase in pavement damage
compared to all other studied configurations. This would result in $1.2 billion to $1.8 billion in
estimated pavement damage every year.
Heavier Single Trailer Trucks
• Certain shippers have lobbied to allow heavier single trailer trucks weighing 91,000 pounds—an
increase of 11,000 pounds compared to today’s trucks—as part of a 10 year pilot program in an
unlimited number of states. Legislation has also been introduced in the past to raise the national
weight limit to 97,000 pounds.
• Legislation to allow 91,000 pound trucks was defeated in the U.S. House in 2015 on a 187-236 vote.
• These 91,000 pound trucks were found in limited state testing by USDOT in 2015 to have 47 percent
higher crash rates and cause $1.1 billion in additional bridge costs.
ti
C L A
9
u m
RESOLUTION 2025-14
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS,
OPPOSING ALL FEDERAL LEGISLATION THAT INCREASES MAXIMUM
ALLOWABLE COMMERCIAL TRUCK SIZE OR WEIGHT; FINDING COMPLIANCE
WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE
HEREOF
WHEREAS, the City of La Porte is concerned with the public safety and welfare of residents and visitors
to our community and the cost, quality, and reliability of the City's infrastructure
specifically local bridges; and
WHEREAS, longer double -trailer commercial trucks across the National Highway System would further
endanger motorists and the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) concluded that
multi -trailer trucks have an 11-percent higher fatal crash rate than single -trailer trucks; and
WHEREAS, allowing heavier or longer trucks on the National Highway System would threaten
the safety of the traveling public because heavier and longer trucks would be more
difficult to control, increase wear and tear on truck safety systems such as brakes,
steering, and fires, and increase crash severity; and
WHEREAS, La Porte is concerned with the safety of its residents and visitors who travel the
same roads and highways as these bigger and heavier trucks; and,
WHEREAS, according to the most recent data by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA), there was a 41.4% increase in fatal crashes involving
commercial trucks in Texas between 2012 to 2022; and
WHEREAS, previously proposed federal legislation to increase maximum allowable truck size
and weight were unfunded mandates leaving local municipalities like La Porte and
its taxpayers to bear the financial burden for infrastructure damage caused by these
bigger and heavier trucks; and,
WHEREAS, the State of Texas has 1,827 local bridges at risk with 91,000-pound trucks with a
replacement cost of $972,982,248; and,
WHEREAS, La Porte residents are highly dependent on multiple roadways all of which are
already heavily impacted by truck size and weight including I-10, Texas State
Highway 146 and Texas State Highway 225; and,
WHEREAS, La Porte elected and professional officials realize economic vitality is enhanced by
traffic mitigation strategies and understand that truck traffic will end up on local
roads in transit, as well.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
LA PORTE, TEXAS, THAT the City of La Porte, Texas, opposes any legislation that increases
maximum allowable truck size or weight at the federal level and encourages our federal delegation
to oppose any and all current and future related legislation.
PASSED and APPROVED this, the 12' day of May 2025.
CITY OF LA PO
Rick Helton, ay r
Y ( CITy tll APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: ' r '•^(''••••...
T , 74-a44.
Clark T. Askins, City Attorney
P.
Also„ t aq(
1
y//
v
Mardi Williams, Councilperson District I Chuck Engelken, Mayor"Pro Tem, Councilperson District 2
Bill Bentley, Wuncilperson District 3 Robe Guerra, Counc ilperson District 4
Ja artin, Councilpersoppistrict 5 Robbie M arrin, Councilperson District 6
o
City of La Porte
Established 1892
ups
May 12, 2025
The Honorable John Cornyn, III
United States Senate
517 Hart Senate Office
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senator Cornyn,
Office of the Mayor
Rick Helton
The City of La Porte is rich in history and built on community,
delivering a safe and attractive environment for all walks of life.
On behalf of the citizens of La Porte, we stand with the National League of Cities, local
elected officials, law enforcement, and emergency responders from across the state of
Texas in opposing all federal legislation to increase truck size and weight on our nation's
highways. An increase in truck size and weights places not only our fellow Texans in danger
but also our community's infrastructure.
Please find enclosed City of La Porte Resolution 2025-14 indicating La Porte's opposition
to any increase in truck size and weight. We respectfully request you oppose this legislation
should it come before you in the future.
Sincere ,
Ric Helton
Mayor
RH/Iw
Enclosure
cc: Scott Pullig, Chief of Police
Chris Pettis, Fire Chief
Planning and Development Director Ryan Hvitlok
Public Works Director Ray Mayo
604 West Fairmont Parkway, La Porte, TX 77571
281-470-5021 1 CitySecretary@LaPorteTX.gov I LaPorteTX.gov/Council
City of La Porte
Office of the Mayor
Rick Helton
Established 1892 The City of La Porte is rich in history and built on community,
delivering a safe and attractive environment for all walks of life.
May 12, 2025
The Honorable Ted Cruz
United States Senate
167 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senator Cruz,
On behalf of the citizens of La Porte, we stand with the National League of Cities, local
elected officials, law enforcement, and emergency responders from across the state of
Texas in opposing all federal legislation to increase truck size and weight on our nation's
highways. An increase in truck size and weights places not only our fellow Texans in danger
but also our community's infrastructure.
Please find enclosed City of La Porte Resolution 2025-14 indicating La Porte's opposition
to any increase in truck size and weight. We respectfully request you oppose this legislation
should it come before you in the future.
Sincerree/l ,
Rick /4elton
Mayor
RH/lw
Enclosure
oc: Scott Pullig, Chief of Police
Chris Pettis, Fire Chief
Planning and Development Director Ryan Hvitlok
Public Works Director Ray Mayo
604 West Fairmont Parkway, La Porte, TX 77571
281-470-5021 1 CitySecretary@LaPorteTX.gov I LaPorteTX.gov/Council
City of La Porte
Office of the Mayor
Rick Helton
Established 1892 The City of La Porte is rich in history and built on community,
delivering a safe and attractive environment for all walks of life.
May 12, 2025
The Honorable Brian Babin
United States House of Representatives
2236 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Dear Representative Babin,
On behalf of the citizens of La Porte, we stand with the National League of Cities, local
elected officials, law enforcement, and emergency responders from across the state of
Texas in opposing all federal legislation to increase truck size and weight on our nation's
highways. An increase in truck size and weights places not only our fellow Texans in danger
but also our community's infrastructure.
Please find enclosed City of Lo Porte Resolution 2025-14 indicating La Porte's opposition
to any increase in truck size and weight. We respectfully request you oppose this legislation
should it come bef re you in the future.
Sincerreelly
Rick Helton
Mayor
RH/lw
Enclosure
cc: Scott Pullig, Chief of Police
Chris Pettis, Fire Chief
Planning and Development Director Ryan Hvitlok
Public Works Director Ray Mayo
604 West Fairmont Parkway, La Porte, Tx 77571
281-470-50211 City5ecretary@LaPorteTx.gov I LaPorteTx.xov/Council