Water Scarcity, City Land and Development

There are some who, in the name of economic development, want to speed-up the sale of city-owned land for development. Most of this land is in the hands of the PSB which has historically been slow to declare land inexpedient - i.e., okay to sell. If land is required for utility infrastructure, flood control or the like, it won't be sold. If the land isn't required for those things and is good deal on the market, it will be sold. Although I've been critical of the PSB's failure to conserve land and their CEO's tight-fistedness in working out any immediate compromise in NW El Paso, I see the value of a land management strategy that is judicious, slow, deliberate and conservative. At the heart of such management should be the need to conserve the City's precious little water supply - a supply getting lower year by year. Factor in drought and global climate change and that scarcity is scary.  By some conservative estimates, El Paso is only 30 years away from needing to import water - a solution not necessarily guaranteed because of shifting political policies and realities in other localities - again because of dramatically decreasing supplies of water. 


Yet, some in the City and on City Council seem hell-bent to sell land faster for development. The Mayor's Blue Ribbon Committee on PSB land management policies has met twice now. At their last meeting on July 16, they voted 5 to 3 to recommend that a new committee be formed to determine whether land is inexpedient. The committee would consist of 5 members: the Mayor as Chair, 2 City Council representatives and 2 PSB members including the sitting Chairperson. They would short circuit what the PSB currently does more carefully: declare land fit to sell.


The Blue Ribbon Committee seems to be dominated by Bulldozing Ted "TxDOT" Haughton who has made it clear that there is only one reason to sell land: to make money and make it now. He was the one who made the motion for a new committee. His initial motion called for more money out of land sales and water revenues to go to the City. When asked by OSAB Chairman, Charlie Wakeem, to remove the additional revenues from his motion, he replied, "I was just trying to get you more money." TxDOT Ted employs a Kindergarten rhetorical style. He bullies by interrupting speakers and saying "you're wrong" or similar as someone makes a point contrary to his own. Haughton is also the one who has not enjoyed the extra audience of PSB member, Dr. Rick Bonart, myself and, at the July 16th meeting, Chris Roberts from the El Paso Times. At both meetings he has asked whether the proceedings were closed. After all, bulldozing TxDOT Ted prefers to do the people's business behind closed doors without the people. When his horrific recommendations finally get sent to City Council (and the PSB?), one hopes that the people will show up because at stake is the most valuable commodity in El Paso: WATER.


Also at the last Blue Ribbon Committee, Rep. Cortney Niland actively engaged the committee. She suggested that estimates of rapidly diminishing water supply are scare tactics and that the solution to our water problems is to drill more wells. If the lakes are running dry (and that is what the bolsons are that help supply our water - underground lakes from the ancient Lake Cabeza de Vaca - then all the drilling on either side of the mountain will find no additional water. 


Read Chris Roberts EP Times story about the blue ribbon meeting and Ms. Niland's comments. Unfortunately, the clueless EP Times Editorial Board endorsed the joint committee and stated that Niland is right that faster land sales means more jobs - well, at least, construction jobs.


Keep in mind that Niland's big campaign contributors are from the development, mortgage and insurance industries especially through the Citizens for Prosperity PAC. The top contributors to that PAC are from the very industries who would benefit from an expedited process to sell City of El Paso land. The El Paso Times (the same paper that rushes to endorse a scheme to sell land based on market benefits rather than water conservation) reported during last year's campaign that Gerald Rubin's River Oak Properties was giving Niland free office space.  They reported that Citizens for Prosperity gave Niland nearly $25,000.


It's not all about economic expansion and jobs. It's also about the City with a bloated budget finding more revenue sources. Behind the move to control the water utility more tightly is a need for greater revenue. If the City succeeds, expect your water bill to go up - and I mean way up. If the City is also successful in expanding the economy by developing land more quickly without regard to water supply, expect a boom and then imagine a site not unlike Chaco Canyon, where a long drought finally brought down the advanced Anasazi Culture. Imagine, El Paso including its new ballpark some day looking like this:

Photo by James Gordon, Chaco Canyon

Sorry, guess those are scare-tactics. However, just for once it would be nice to know that our El Paso developers and friends made decisions not just on the basis of the immediate gratification of exorbitant wealth but with a sense of community and what is good for their grandchildren's grandchildren. 


What's another reason for declaring land inexpedient? Conservation of that land in its natural state in perpetuity by conservation easements. Wouldn't it have been great if the PSB/EPWU's CEO had embraced that policy rather than attempting to keep the power to control sales to himself. Those who want economic expansion now only want to be more efficient than Mr. Archuleta and the PSB. But efficiency shouldn't be the issue. Saving our water for future generations should be.