Is Sustainability a Goal or Just Words?

The City Council of El Paso recently approved a sustainability plan. The mission plan is:

"By 2014, El Paso will be a model of sustainability and smart growth by building on its roots as an international hub, promoting sustainable enterprises and wisely using natural resources."

2014 may be too far away. Judging by the overuse of rock and gravel in private and public landscapes all over the City, the possible overbuilding of public facilities and Jobe's plan to quarry next to the largest intra-urban State Park in the country, El Paso is far from wisely using natural resources.

One wonders whether master plans such as the Sustainability document are not just words. After all, Arroyo 41A was designated to be preserved as the Mountain to River corridor. Once the General Land Office leased property containing a portion of that arroyo to Jobe Materials, public officials acted much like ostriches with their heads in the ground. Now that Stanley Jobe has made it abundantly clear that he intends to quarry all 480 acres, City officials say that there is nothing that they can do - City zoning laws apparently do not apply to State of Texas land managed by the GLO even if that land is within the city's limits.

Recently, Public Service Board/EPWU officials proposed an Alternative route for the Mountain to River Trail. One of the top officials of the EPWU told me that they had decided on the route once they realized that Jobe intended to mine limestone in Arroyo 41A. The implication was that the realization was fairly recent. However, they must have known that he would do so when they gave him access to the land. By law you can't landlock someone else and so El Paso Water Utilities had to grant Jobe an easement through their property to the GLO land and did so on May 20, 2005.

It would appear that EPWU/PSB officials have known for a number of years now that a portion of the proposed Mountain to River corridor could very well be mined. If they knew, then shouldn't the City Council also have known? After all, Mayor Cook is a board member of the PSB. If City Council knew so early on, what was the point of accepting in its entirety the January 2007 Open Space plan ("Towards a Bright Future: A Green Infrastructure Plan for El Paso, Texas") that called for preserving all of Arroyo 41A?

Click on image to enlarge

The alternative route is the light blue line on the map above. Note that only a small - yet critical - portion of 41A goes through the very bottom of the GLO land leased to Jobe. One wonders why pressure cannot be applied from elected and other officials and the public at large to make Jobe forsake that small portion of land. If sustainability and the wise use of resources is the goal, why not start right here?

Of course, there is yet another threat to Arroyo 41A a bit west of the GLO/Jobe Quarry: the Desert Springs development currently plans reducing the 1200 foot arroyo to just 120 feet, concreting the sides and building some roads over it in several places. To say that the developer's plans may be grandfathered so that he doesn't have to comply to codes requiring keeping the arroyo to at least 300 feet, is still missing the larger point that El Paso envisions one thing and does another.

An insider recently informed me:

"Individual City staff may or may not be in favor of "economic development" as exemplified by Jobe and the homebuilders' style of growth. The staff is mainly concerned with staying out of trouble, and the developers can make big trouble if any legal boundaries are crossed.

"The zoning and subdivision codes are the legal tools that have to be followed. The developers worked very hard to ensure that those codes were "vetted" by their own lawyers, lobbyists and friends before they were adopted by the City. If the land is zoned for whatever the developer wants, the law allows them to do it. If it's not zoned for what they want the law allows them to request a zone change and the Council can grant it.

"The Open Space plan and the General Land Use Plan are legally just "guides" to decision making by the Council, so they can approve zoning that is not in conformity with the Plans. (There is actually some legal precedent for holding Councils more accountable to such plans, but it is rare in Texas. There may be some precedent on the GLO immunity issue as well, but of course not from Texas.)

"Botttom line- the developers have the law on their side in most cases and there is too much apathy to try to change the laws again. (Look at the all the fighting over the subdivision code rewrite last year that resulted in nothing more than some very minor changes.)"

If El Paso wants to make sustainability and the wise use of resources its goal, it must begin to stand up and, at the very least, use the bully pulpit, or even more, grow a backbone and start standing up legally to those who would destroy riparian corridors and thus cheapen all of our lives and fortunes.