Water and land: why care if it will always be there - right?

In Texas, where about 95 percent of the land is privately owned, and 83 percent of that land is rural farms, ranches, forests, plains and deserts, it’s essential that all Texans understand the connection between land and water to ensure the healthy stewardship of both, according to natural resource professional Kathy Wythe (Texas Water Resources Institute, Texas H2O).

Did you know that rain—whether it falls in Colorado, New Mexico or Texas—replenishes our water supplies so we have water that comes out of the tap at home? When land is managed properly, water will flow to rivers or be absorbed into the ground. It is critical to know that good water stewardship is not enough; we must also conserve the lands that help us conserve our water.  

A Texas statewide voter opinion survey conducted by Hill Research in December, 2014, found that 92% of respondents saw parks as especially important in tough economic times and that 88% viewed parks as essential to healthy living and an active lifestyle for Texans. In addition 84% understood the need for protecting natural areas. 

We have even stronger support in west Texas for open space and parks. The survey by Hill Research goes on to state that in West Texas 96% of the people believe that unless we protect Texas’ natural areas we will lose the very things that makes Texas such a special place in which to live. In addition, the survey showed that 94% believe that public parks and natural areas are especially important to families needing an affordable recreational outlet. 

It’s clear that there is support for conservation and preservation of our region’s water, wildlife and open lands. One way to ensure that land is preserved is with a conservation easement.  A conservation easement is a voluntary, legal agreement between a landowner and a land trust such as the Frontera Land Alliance, that permanently limits uses of the land in order to protect its conservation values, while allowing the owner to retain title and continue to manage the land with certain mutually agreed upon limitations.   

The Frontera Land Alliance and the landowner work together to write a conservation easement that reflects both the landowner's desires and ensures the protection of all existing conservation values. A conservation easement restricts development to the degree that is necessary to protect those values be they scenic views, water, wildlife habitat, plants, forests, deserts, etc. Every conservation easement is uniquely tailored to a particular landowner's goals and land. 

Through such preservation you’re impacting more than just you and your family. You are leaving a legacy to for future generations by maintaining an irreplaceable view of a mountain, the preservation of a working pecan groves or cotton fields, by keeping an arroyo open for water to flow naturally, or by assuring that a natural corridor continues to provide a safe pathway for wildlife in an ever-growing urban setting. 

El Paso is a very special place. We’re separated by great distances from other large urban centers in Texas and surrounded by ranches, farms, deserts and a major mountain range. The types of plants and wildlife found in our region are irreplaceable (as are, of course, the people who live there). And it’s also the case that “It’s better outdoors!” to cite the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department’s motto. So by being outdoors you improve your mental and physical self - whether sitting on a bench or biking on a trail. A conservation easement is a very effective way to protect those special places in our lives and ensure they will be there for those who follow us.

-Janae’ Renaud Field

Conservation Easement Workshop November 2

The Frontera Land Alliance

Conservation Easement Workshop

November 2, 2012

The Frontera Land Alliance, the El Paso area’s only non-profit 501 c (3) land trust organization, is hosting a Conservation Workshop on November 2 at the downtown El Paso Doubletree Hotel, 600 N. El Paso Street, just south of I-10.

Please join our guest speakers—several attorneys from Braun and Gresham, PLLC and Robertson/Smith Attorneys at Law—to hear all about the many conservation tools that are available.  Two sessions will be offered. The first (8 a.m.-4:00 p.m.) is aimed at advisors; the second (8 a.m.-1:00 p.m.) is oriented toward the needs of landowners and the general public eager to learn how a conservation easement can be of use to them. 

Half-day Landowner Session (8-1:00): This session is for landowners and the general public. Topics: What landowners need to know about intrusion on surface use – Oil & Gas, Pipelines, Power Lines, and Condemnation; Wildlife Management for Property Taxes; Estate Planning; Introduction to Conservation Easements; Landowner comments about experience on donating conservation easements; Farm and Ranch Properties—Family Legacy or Liability; and Closing Comments.

·         Admission is free for owners of ranches, farms or natural areas. All others please pay $30.

All-day Advisor Session (8-4:00): This is a full-day workshop for attorneys, estate planners, CPAs and appraisers, who will learn how conservation tools can benefit their clients. (All participants earn continuing-education credits.) Topics: Estate Planning; Conservation Easements 101; Farm and Ranch Properties: Family Legacy or Liability; What Landowners Need to Know about Intrusion on Surface Use – Oil & Gas, Pipelines, Power Lines, and Condemnation; Wildlife Management for Property Taxes. Cost to each advisor: $80.00, which includes breakfast, lunch, and all materials, in addition to earning continuing-education credits.

·         6.5 attorney/estate planners  (To clarify: An estate planner doesn’t get credit unless they are an attorney or a certified financial planner);

·         4.0 for CPA’s,

·         7.0 for CFP’s  

·         6.0 for real estate 

Over view of topics:

Estate Planning

This course examines the issues and strategies for asset protection, limiting liability, planning for mental disability to avoid conservatorship, dealing with probate, minimizing or eliminating federal estate tax, and the options for leaving land to heirs. The impending end of the Bush-era tax cuts makes these issues more challenging for landowners. This overview of issues and strategies will equip you to identify issues related to estate planning and  answer initial questions from your clients.

Conservation Easements 101

This introductory course covers the nuts and bolts of this topic, including conservation easements basics, how they generate financial benefits, such as federal income and estate tax savings, how best to structure transactions; practical considerations in negotiating conservation easement terms, selecting and working with land trusts, and the use of conservation easements with other planning strategies.

Farm and Ranch Properties — Family Legacy or Liability?

Review of strategies and tools for estate planning that involve significant rural land holdings. Farms, ranches and recreational lands present unique challenges to estate planners if the family wishes to keep land undeveloped. Tools such as conservation easements, sale of development rights, sales of ecosystem services, tenants in common and management trusts will be covered.

Seating is limited. For more information or to register please contact Janaé Reneaud Field, Executive Director, The Frontera Land Alliance, 915-351-8352 or janae@fronteralandalliance.org.

Contact:

Janae’ Reneaud Field

Executive Director

The Frontera Land Alliance
Janae@Fronteralandalliance.org
Office Phone: 915-351-TFLA (8352)
Fax: 915-351-8353
Office Address: 1201 N. Mesa St., El Paso Texas 79902
Mailing Address: 3800 N. Mesa, Suite A2-258,  El Paso, Texas 79902
www.Fronteralandalliance.org

P.S. Don’t forget to sign up for the November 2, ½ day or full day Conservation Workshop.

Advisors can earn continued education credits: 6.0 attorney/estate planners  (To clarify: An estate planner doesn’t get credit unless they are an attorney or a certified financial planner); 4.0 for CPA’s, 7.0 for CFP/estate planners, and 6.0 for real estate. Seating is limited. For more information or to register please contact Janaé Reneaud Field, Executive Director, The Frontera Land Alliance, 915-351-8352 or janae@fronteralandalliance.org.

TPWD Does Disburse Land - Conservation Easement Needed

Following up from yesterday's post, here again is the vintage Risher Gilbert quote: "Some people don't trust the PSB, don't trust the City Council, and now don't trust the state park. At some point, we have to have some trust here."

Again: there is some trust - in the law, in contracts, in courts, in unbiased third parties.

Just browse through this document:

TPWD State Park Land Dispositions

It shows land sold, transferred or otherwise disposed of or disbursed by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. There is no guarantee that land given to  the TPWD will stay with the TPWD. Several years ago they sought to trade a few acres of Franklin Mountains State Park land for the building on Clark where  TPWD offices. That building is owned by TxDOT. The deal was not made not because of TPWD but because TxDOT didn't want to do it.  Nothing against the TPWD - but conditions, circumstances, key players, institutional memory, etc., etc. change. A conservation easement is the only guarantee that land will remain natural in perpetuity.


Unlike some suggestions by our less than trustworthy Ms. Gilbert, there are TPWD lands that have conservation easements:

Here are five examples: 

1.      Black Gap Wildlife Management Area, Brewster County

2.      Caddo Lake Wildlife Management Area, Harrison & Marion Counties

3.      Devils River State Natural Area, Val Verde County

4.      Devils River Ranch State Natural Area, Val Verde County

5.      Government Canyon State Natural Area, Bexar County

Information was provided by Corky Kuhlmann, Project Manager, Land Conservation, Texas Parks and Wildlife Dept., 512-389-4590.


It's a good plan to transfer the land in the NW Master Plan to the State Park. However, a conservation easement must be part of the mix. That's a deal that can be trusted in perpetuity.

Water Conservation

On Tuesday, July 17, Planning and Development staff will present their proposal to City Council that land in the NW Master Plan be conserved by transferring the land to the State Park with a reversion clause that the land will return to the City if it doesn’t remain in use as natural open space recreation. (Some contingencies will be in the deed to allow utility infrastructure if needed.) As reported, the PSB unanimously supported a conservation easement be placed on the land if it should ever revert. Of course, that only begs the question, why not use a conservation easement now? On the 17^th staff will make their recommendation (see Scribd insert at elpasonaturally post). PSB will report their recommendation. Frontera Land Alliance and others will present a case for a conservation easement now. A good way for you to learn more about these easements is to read an article published in the El Paso Inc. by Janae Reneaud Field, the Director of the Frontera Land Alliance: How land trusts conserve natural areas. Do note that the area being “conserved” in the NW Master Plan does not include the principal arroyos through the developed areas. What happened to them?

With water running again in the Rio Grande, El Pasoans are once again enjoying a normal watering schedule. However, one word to the wise from EPWU CEO Ed Archuleta after he recently met with the New Mexico and Texas Irrigation Districts plus Mexican officials and IBWC:  “[I]t looks like the water from the river will last until September 1.  As you know our season is normally March through October so this season started later and will end sooner.”  No doubt that one of the best water management strategies is the one Archuleta has used: limiting the use of water particularly outdoor watering. Along with that restriction has been a concerted effort to educate the public about water conservation including giving away water-saving devices. In a recent Texas Tribune article, confirmation is given to the EPWU’s strategy to conserve water.

Nevertheless, fixing leaks, limiting outdoor watering and using water saving appliances and devices really only postpones the problem of water shortage. It buys time.  Some thoughts:

At a recent City Council meeting, City Engineer Alan Shubert attested that he was already formulating a new list of park ponds to re-do with turf. Guess where they will steal the money from for more turf to water – the 10% stormwater fee meant for natural open space acquisition. More turf or more natural open space? Which conserves more water? Also keep an eye on the fact that City officials have begun calling some parks as “open space” parks. It’s propaganda.

The Mayor’s Blue Ribbon Committee looking into PSB land management and acquisition issues is now meeting. One issue before them is the method by which land is declared inexpedient by the PSB so that it can be sold. Besides potential revenue, there should be another reason for declaring land inexpedient: the need to preserve natural open space for the sake of natural open space. Some might argue that we would be giving away land. In fact, we would be keeping land that is ours and increasing the value of our land not preserved. Why would the value increase? Because land without water is worthless and, if we keep up the pace of sprawl without preserving natural open space, we will end up with a lot of worthless land.


Smart growth-smart code is good for long-term water conservation.  Just add green infrastructure/low impact development.

Get visionary – really far out there visionary. Los Angeles, a city built on stealing vast amounts of water from other areas to grow a population in an arid environment like ours, is trying to be proactive.  Learn about C-Change.LA, a program for water and energy conservation in the face of rapid climate change.

One of the strategies employed by C-Change.LA is the increase of the urban canopy of trees. Read L.A. Climate Study Shows Need for Cooling Effect of Tree Canopies. Yet, the City of El Paso has only maintained as a tree SUB-committee (of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board) what once was a Tree Board. The SUB-committee is there for mere window-dressing for its Tree USA trophy. Now that Parks and Recreation is reviewing their Design and Construction Standards, one would think that P&R Director Nanette Smejkal would have long sought a meeting of that SUB-committee. Trees must be a huge part of the City’s water conservation, energy and sustainability strategies. As of now, we have a City Arborist under the direction of Transportation and a genuine “blue ribbon committee of tree experts” relegated to sub-committee status.  (Those experts include State Forester, Oscar Mestas, horticulturalist and curator, John White, tree experts Vern Autry and Lewis Wright, City Arborist and tree farmer, Brent Pearson, landscaper Jennifer Barr, Master Gardener President Dave Turner and many other well-qualified persons. AND, they are a SUB-Committee!)

Do checkout Tucson’s rainwater harvesting program. El Paso/PSB/EPWU, where are you? (TecH20 does have a short presentation about rainwater capture on Saturday, August 18^th, from 10:30 to 11:30 a.m. Presenter Doc Stalker is quite the expert.  Plan to attend.)

Think water footprint. This way we look at the larger global picture of water and our participation in waste and/or conservation. Don’t get me wrong. Archuleta’s and the EPWU’s water conservation program is great and ought to be followed. But in terms of what is sustainable today, tomorrow and beyond our grandchildren’s great-grandchildren, there is much more to do and to change.

Do check out your water utility’s Less Is the New More program and get involved. Like and follow EPWU’s Facebook page. Finally, if you twitter and tweet, follow EPWU on Twitter. 

And the biggest matter when it comes to saving water and managing an increasingly scarce resource: water law and policy which must become more publicly directed. The PSB is not “public”. Did you vote for anyone on that board? Can you the public remove any of them? Water decisions for the Water Improvement District are limited to a few large farmers and other “water rights owners” now thanks to “Chente” Quintanilla  and Sen. Jose Rodríguez. Instead of disenfranchising 75,000 voters, they should have looked at including all voters. Water law and policy must change . . . radically.

Finally, for what it is worth, my two cents about the new ballpark.

Conservation Workshop Scheduled for November 2nd

Click on image to enlarge.

PSB Endorses Use of Conservation Easement

MORE BREAKING NEWS: By a unanimous vote today, the PSB passed a motion made by Mayor John Cook to deed the open space land in the NW Master Plan to the State for inclusion into the Franklin Mountain State Park. There would be deed restrictions which would require the land to revert back to the City if it is not used for passive recreation, etc. Upon reversion, the motion states, a Conservation Easement will be put on the land. As one conservationist has already put it: “Thank you, PSB!” The motion is much better than one sought by the Risher-Adauto presentation which called for no conservation easement at all and rather pushed the concept of a “Utility Green Space”. 

Conservation Strategy - PSB 061312 Ppt


PSB’s recommendation still begs the question why there shouldn’t be a conservation easement put on the land from the very beginning. Now that all of the red herrings have been disposed of and it has been shown that Frontera does have money, a back-up is there as evidenced by a recent letter of support from the Texas Land Conservancy to Frontera, managing the easement is not an expensive proposition and Frontera would be glad to do the job if asked – there is no reason why a CE couldn’t be put on the land in the first place as PSB member, David Nemir, expressed in one of his questions. In fact, Frontera President, Mike Gaglio, praised the idea of deeding the land to the State while at the same time adding the CE. Hired PSB attorney Gilbert argued that a CE shouldn’t be accepted because it would be another layer of protection and bureaucracy. There really isn’t any bureaucracy involved but she is exactly right about the extra layer of protection – exactly the reason for a conservation easement.

A Conservation Easement is the only means by which the land is preserved in its natural open state. The State of Texas can always sell land. With the current expansion of Transmountain by TxDOT and the planned expansion of Paseo del Norte, pressure will begin for commercial development. Look at any frontage road or any major thoroughfare especially in East El Paso.  Look at the shenanigans with Blackie Chesher Park property at the burgeoning corner of I-10 and Zaragoza. No wonder some want to conveniently lose, alter, challenge or whatever deeds that required the land to be used for a park. Had there only been a CE on Blackie Chesher, City Council Representative Eddie Holguin would not have to deal with evasion after evasion.

Additionally, some State of Texas parks have come with conservation easements. There is nothing new or illegal with placing that kind of easement on the land prior to transferring to the State.

The matter now goes to the City Council and is currently scheduled for their July 17^th meeting.


Another critical issue that still needs to be fleshed out is the preservation of the arroyos in their natural state. The arroyos should not be treated simply as stormwater flow paths but as the sensitive riparian corridors that they are. Unless green infrastructure/ low impact development tools are employed in the proposed Dover Kohl development, then the arroyos will have to be modified. The Risher-Adauto presentation doesn’t quite get it and it speaks of trying to save the arroyos as much as possible with hybrid channels and environmentally sensitive infrastructure. It seems that they are still coming from the perspective of maximizing development and doing the best one can with the arroyos. The real approach should be to maximize the preservation of the arroyos which the presentation seems to suggest as well by using LID goals (page 8 of the presentation). If you follow those goals and modify (if necessary) the development plan, then there will be no reason not to keep the arroyos completely natural – no modification. Nothing has happened yet - no bulldozer has scraped natural earth. Now is the time to assure complete protection. Here’s an idea: take a GIS map of the area, draw where the arroyos are and overlay where development structures (e.g., homes) will be. 

Elpasonaturally wants to see that map with the overlays.

Obviously there is much more to be said about all of the above including that today’s vote may be the dawn of a new era. The PSB/EPWU should be a natural ally with the conservation/environmental community. Because of so much animosity and distrust over power issues involving land, this is currently not the case. This vote begins to take us there – a new partnership among conservationists, City Planners and the PSB to conserve our beautiful part of the Chihuahuan Desert. Let us hope.

Finally, with the update of the Parks and Recreation Master Plan in progress much has been said recently about seeing Parks and Recreation in a different way than the current business model of turf, organized recreation and bingo. Parks can be a powerful tool for creating a more walkable community that connects people with Nature and each other. Please read Masters of the Master Plan from this month’s Parks & Recreation magazine. Oh – and I can’t help throwing in one more/last thing: please visit the City of Tucson’s rainwater harvesting page. If only . . .

Why a Conservation Easement Still Makes Sense

Frontera Hugs Its Cactuses but Also Lugs Its Load

Many people think of the Frontera Land Alliance as just another little cactus-hugging group. “Oh those people mean well, but …” It’s true of course that the current members of the Frontera Board of Directors—Mike Gaglio (president), Richard Teschner (vice president), Scott Winton (secretary), Charlie Wakeem (treasurer), Scott Cutler (at large), Doug Echlin, John Moses and Kevin von Finger, and our Executive Director Janaé Reneaud Field—never forget to hug their front-yard ocotillos as they head for work each day. But Frontera itself is somewhat more than passing prickly hugs. Thanks to the generosity of our donors and the wisdom of our investments, with $100,000 in the bank we are not “broke” (as our critics have contended). Thanks to on-going supplementary donations we routinely consult with our traditional law firm and also hire attorneys from smaller firms as the need arises. We are engaging in partnership with the Texas Land Conservancy for “back-up” and continuity in the hyper-unlikely event that Frontera blows away in the winds of April. Our fees for managing a conservation easement are not “exorbitant”; in fact, and as Janaé pointed out at one of the meetings of the Joint City-PSB Committee she was invited to speak and interact at, easement management costs depend entirely on the details of the easement, which she is asking the City to provide—such things as appraisal, survey, title, Environmental Phase One and so forth. To quote Janaé, “the direct cost to Frontera to hold a conservation easement is just the annual site visit, which on the average is $500. And if any violations occur then we’re also dealing with legal fees and staff time.” Janaé continues: “If Frontera were to manage the Scenic Corridor as a park for public use, the City must tell us what it wants—restrooms? Parking? Trails? Campgrounds? Picnic sites? Barbeque grills? Swings and slides, sandboxes and teeter totters? The City hasn’t told us that. That is why a partnership with Texas Parks and Wildlife is best: Frontera holds the conservation easement (thus guaranteeing that the 837-acre Scenic Corridor property remains conserved in perpetuity), while the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) manages and/or owns the land.”

And in light of the report (presented to OSAB just yesterday—June 6—by staffer Carlos Gallinar of the City Development Department) from the Joint City-PSB Committee, that’s what Frontera supports: a combination of Plan One (whereby the City enters into a partnership with the TPWD, dedicating and/or selling the 837 acres to TPWD for incorporation into the Franklin Mountains State Park) and Plan Four, which deploys a conservation easement to Frontera [the El Paso area’s only 501(c)3 non-profit land trust] so the land can be conserved in perpetuity. The problem with not deploying a conservation easement is that TPWD has sometimes sold its park land to private concerns, and this would set a bad precedent for the 837 acres. The problem with the Joint City-PSB Committee’s fall-back recommendation—that the land be dedicated as a city park—can be summed up in just two words: “Blackie Chesher.” That city park’s history is well known. Gifted to the City in the early 1960s with several deed restrictions, the Blackie Chesher Regional Park (of the City of El Paso) is now the home to several uses that the deed restrictions don’t permit. Had a conservation easement been applied to Blackie Chesher, none of that would have happened. Instead, the land would be preserved in perpetuity. As we insist the 837 acres be.

--Richard Teschner

Public Meetings on Parks Master Plan Update + Breaking News on NW Master Plan

Elpasonaturally readers, please pay close attention: The City of El Paso is updating the Department of Parks & Recreation’s Master Plan, which is their main guide for what they do. The current leadership at Parks and Recreation is narrowly focused primarily on turf, club sports and senior citizen bingo.  These are good things BUT conservation, preservation of eco-systems, learning about nature and using natural open space are nether regions of monsters and abyss beyond their flat earth thinking.  There will be two meetings to present recommendations and receive public input on the Parks Master Plan. Please make plans to attend either meeting and provided your input for parks in El Paso.  Meetings are this Thursday, June 7^th at 6 p.m. and Saturday, June 9^th at 10 a.m. Both will be held at the El Paso Museum of Art, 1 Arts Festival Plaza, off Santa Fe Street downtown. (Map) Franklin Mountains Wilderness Coalition President Scott Cutler says, “In addition to more natural open space parks for people to participate in and learn about nature, there are a number of other new concepts for parks that the Parks and Recreation Department should consider.”  Dave Wilson of the Borderland Mountain Bike Association wrote: “I'll be attending the one on Thursday evening.  Hopefully I'll be able to present some ideas for Chuck Heinrich Park in regards to safe access, more parking, etc. for the mountain bikers and hikers trying to access the state park.” Please read some thoughts about the Master Plan at elpasonaturally.  Also read a great article from the April 2012 Parks and Recreation magazine and a great article about planting more trees. You can see the current Master Plan online.

Sample questions to ask and/or things to look for in the updated Master Plan: How much focus is there on conservation and conservation education? How well does the new plan connect people with Nature? Is bicycling, walking and hiking main considerations? What kind of connections are made between parks, neighborhoods and natural open space? What is being done to build the urban tree canopy? Do birds and other animals have a place in the plan? Are natural open space parks being given proper attention? (There are actually several of these properties in the Parks inventory and most are ignored.) How are Seniors and others connected with the outdoors and plant and animal studies? Any mention of parks programs with emphasis on the natural sciences? What about organic maintenance of our parks and recreational facilities, the use of rainwater harvesting? BTW, the Department of General Services now maintains our parks, ball fields and recreational facilities. What role have they played in shaping the new Master Plan? How will our parks program participate in the City’s new comprehensive plan, Plan El Paso? Will it help promote Smart Growth and Green Infrastructure/Low Impact Development? Will it seek to protect the environment, ecosystems and habitats?

Please make an effort to attend at least one of these meetings.

BREAKING NEWS: The City/PSB Committee charged with making final recommendations for the NW Master Plan has unanimously decided that the best way to preserve land in the NW Master Plan in perpetuity is through a partnership with the Franklin Mountains State Park. Their fallback position is to dedicate that land as a City Park. Mr. Carlos Gallinar of City Planning gave the presentation just this afternoon to the Open Space Advisory Board on behalf of a joint City-PSB Committee that has been charged to make recommendations to City Council regarding the NW Master Plan especially in the light of a successful petition drive that calls for preserving land in its natural state in perpetuity.  When asked about the “negatives” for choosing a conservation easement, Mr. Gallinar would not elaborate.

There have been recent attempts to undermine conservation easements based on falsehoodsabout Frontera Land Alliance: Frontera is broke, their fees for managing a conservation easement are exorbitant, and that there is no back-up should Frontera not be able to fulfill its duties as land trustees. All of these statements are false as an email from Frontera Treasurer Charlie Wakeem explains. (Link directly above.) 

No matter the committee has unanimously recommended a partnership with the State Park. You can see the presentation to OSAB.  I will post more at elpasonaturally and through this e-letter as I learn more.

Charlie Wakeem gave an excellent Annual Report about the Open Space Advisory Board to City Council yesterday. See the presentation.

Now that O’Rourke has ousted eight-term Representative Silvestre Reyes, what is next for the conservation of Castner Range?  This is an important question since Reyes’ office had worked closely with the Castner Conservation Conveyance Committee (“4-C’s” crafted from Frontera Land Alliance and the Franklin Mountains Wilderness Coalition) and had engineered a $300,000 earmark that funded a critical study essential for conveyance and a work in progress, the Castner CLUP (Conceptual Land Use Plan). It will take anywhere from 32 to 64 million dollars to clean up unexploded ordnance (UXO) on the Range. However, it isn’t all just a matter of money. Castner is somewhere in the middle of a Department of Defense list of properties that not only need this kind of clean-up but are actively seeking it. O’Rourke has made it clear that he supports the clean-up and preservation of Castner Range so that the natural open space can be enjoyed by all. A political-insider has said that O’Rourke “understands the wonders of the Chihuahua Desert ecosystem.”

Finally, if you have an interest in weather and would like to help your local community as well as scientists and others interested in precipitation, then there is a fun program for you: CoCoRaHS (the Community Collaborative Rain, Hail and Snow Network). Learn how you can get involved by becoming part of the backyard rain gauge brigade.

Joint City-PSB Committee Says NO to Conservation Easements

Below is a presentation given by Mr. Carlos Gallinar of the City of El Paso Planning Department to the Open Space Advisory Board this afternoon giving recommendations from a joint PSB/City Committee to City Council regarding going forward on the NW Master Plan. A critical component of their recommendations is to preserve land in the NW Master Plan area in its natural state through a partnership with the Franklin Mountains State Park. I will be discussing this matter more in depth probably in a post tomorrow. For now, here is the presentation:

NW Master Plan Presentation to OSAB with Recommendations 060512

Untruths Continue to Circulate about Conservation Easements

From a story (Saving water, preserving land) by Colin McDonald in today's San Antonio Express-News, is this strategy for ensuring clean water:

"Levels of a colorless solvent that the Environmental Protection Agency links to liver damage and possibly cancer recently spiked in a monitoring well of the Edwards Aquifer on San Antonio's North Side.

"San Antonio's only defense against this and other pollution reaching its production wells is dilution from the clean water flowing into the aquifer from the rural land west of the city.

"To ensure that there is clean water entering the aquifer, the city's Edwards Aquifer Protection Program is about to spend an additional $90 million from a voter-approved one-eighth-cent sales tax to buy conservation easements over the aquifer's recharge zone. So far, the program has spent $135 million from the tax, protecting more than 90,000 acres."

The italicized letters are my emphasis.


San Antonio has had this enlightened, progressive program going for a number of years now. When the President of El Paso's Frontera Land Alliance, Mike Gaglio, urged Mayor John Cook and EPWU/PSB CEO Ed Archuleta to consider a similar approach in El Paso, his response was no response. Gaglio tells us:

"A few years ago I sent an email to Ed Archuleta and Mayor Cook about San Antonio's Conservation Easement Purchase Program and urged them to consider something similarly progressive in El Paso.  I never received a response.   It would be nice to talk to them about this and use it to demonstrate the excellent use of CEs by public entities for the purposes of water protection.  Frontera has contacts and maintains regular dialogue with the folks that actually put this program into place."

Again, emphasis is mine.

One of the principal stumbling blocks for finally bringing the protection of the Scenic Corridor to completion is the issue of a conservation easement. Petitioners asked that land in the NW Master Plan be preserved in perpetuity as natural open space along with some other requests. Many, but not all, petitioners are at least willing to see a scenario presented by Dover Kohl and approved by City Council as a compromise plan just as long as arroyos are preserved and natural open space (including the arroyos) are preserved in perpetuity. 

From the very beginning of working out "compromise" there has been a steady misrepresentation of conservation easements by PSB (and elpasonaturally believes) City attorneys. Hired PSB gun, Risher Gilbert, made some inaccurate claims publicly especially that municipally owned lands can never be under a conservation easement. In fact there are examples of such all over the country and in Texas and in El Paso: Thunder Canyon.

Now there are a new set of blatant untruths about the conservation easement process making the rounds in an effort to assure that the final legal product employed is one by which the City and/or PSB maintains control enough over the land to take it out of preservation at a time of its own choosing. 

The lies (and let's not mince words) go like this: Frontera Land Alliance is broke. Their management fees are too high. They have no back-up plan should  they indeed go broke. In an email, Charlie Wakeem, Treasurer of Frontera, repied:

1. Frontera "isn't" in the red!!!!  I should know.  I'm the Treasurer.  There's over $100k in the bank and no liabilities.   
2. Frontera has no management fee for CEs.  There are costs associated with starting up the CE, such as a survey, appraisal, attorney's fees, title search, and an environmental assessment.  Those costs can be negotiated between the Grantor and Grantee.  After the conservation easement is in place, the land trust solicits donations for an endowment to manage the terms of the CE, and not management of the land.  The property owner may or may not choose to donate to the endowment.
3. What happens to the CE if Frontera folds?  The CE runs with the land and another land trust would take over, and could be specified in the CE document, but is optional.

That's the truth. The question is whether members of City Council will hear it or be led by those who really don't want to give up control of the natural open space in question. Just look at Blackie Chesher Park - land given with the clear, unequivocal understanding that the land be used as a public park. In attempt to undermine that perpetual desire, the PSB and the City seem to have problems coming up with a proper deed and cannot even answer Rep. Eddie Holguin's questions. 

One more question: what possibly can be accomplished by spending tens of thousands of taxpayer and rate payer dollars to come up with something that a conservation easement already does? Answer: the top brass will spend your money ad infinitum to get their bloody way.

Conservation Easement?

Last letter I reported a timeline for completing the necessary ordinance work for the NW Master Plan including the preservation of the Scenic Corridor. This followed the March 20^th City Council decision to select the Dover Kohl scenario that included development on both sides of Transmountain while preserving 837 acres which is slightly more than the 780 called for in the petition. The plan, however, did extend Paseo del Norte across Transmountain which is congruent with TxDOT’s plan to build an interchange at that intersection but not in keeping with the petition language. The timeline quickly evaporated.  Planning  tells me that it will take more time to review the smart code application before that application goes to CPC and, one would hope, OSAB. This may take up to 4 or 6 more weeks. Parallel to the smart code application is the City’s legal department’s drafting ordinance language that includes the conservation. Nothing devious here by the way and a good reason for delay. A smart code application does take time.  A conservation easement requires a correct metes and bounds survey.  Planning wants to hold stakeholder meetings to review that language and that may take time to be done right. Certainly information about stakeholder meeting will be something many of you will want.

The biggest concern is the conservation easement piece.  As of now the EPWU’s hired attorney, Risher Gilbert, is working with City attorneys to fashion some kind of in-house conservation strategy. At the special PSB meeting that considered the Dover Kohl proposals for the NW Master Plan, Ms. Gilbert made the following five points about conservation easements:

1.       Conservation easements were created by the IRS in the 1980s to provide tax incentives for private property owners.

2.       Conservation easements are for private property only.

3.       Land trusts cannot hold conservation easements on public land.

4.       Conservation easements are inflexible and the land being preserved cannot be altered or used in any way.

5.       A “Conservation Covenant” is a different mechanism than CEs that can be used to preserve public land in perpetuity.  It would be an internal mechanism created by the City and/or PSB controlling the land. 

All of these statements are untrue except 5 and the proof is in the pudding on that one. Why re-invent the wheel unless you are adding a gear to control the wheel?

Also adding to the concern about how the City plans to conserve the land is this:  to my knowledge there has not been any communication between the City and Frontera Land Alliance, the only land trust organization in El Paso. This lack of communication has not been because City officials are unaware of Frontera. The Vice-President of that organization, Richard Teschner, first publically mentioned Frontera 18 months ago at a City Council meeting where Planning brass was present.  Teschner then and subsequently has mentioned to City Council Frontera’s willingness and ability as the El Paso area’s only 501(c)3 land trust organization to deploy and then manage a conservation easement on whatever acreage Council voted to conserve.   I have also raised the matter time and again with Planning staff.

In terms of a timeline, know that City Council at their last regular meeting (April 3^rd) postponed action on the actual language of the petition for eight weeks.  So stay tuned.

From the grapevine there is talk about a new petition to preserve all of the City land on the west side including the land in the NW Master Plan and everything north of it. We are also keeping an eye on efforts to get National Monument status for the Organ Mountains.

Here’s big news and an event a number of you may want to attend: A Texas-New Mexico Watershed Steward Workshop on water quality issues related to the Paso del Norte watershed will be held from 8 a.m. until 4 p.m. on May 9 at the Texas AgriLife Research and Extension Center, 1380 A&M Circle in El Paso.  (Map)

“The training is free and open to anyone interested in improving water quality in the Paso del Norte region, said program coordinators. Participants are encouraged to preregister at http://tws.tamu.edu.  The workshop is sponsored by the Texas AgriLife Extension Service and Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board as part of the Texas Watershed Steward program. It is being held in conjunction with the New Mexico Environment Department, New Mexico Cooperative Extension and Paso del Norte Watershed Council.

‘The workshop is designed to help watershed residents improve and protect their water resources and gain a better understanding of how water quality in the Rio Grande is managed in Texas and New Mexico,’ said Galen Roberts, AgriLife Extension program specialist and coordinator for the Texas Watershed Steward Program.”

Read the full press release about the workshop.

You also may be interested in the efforts of Wild Earth Guardians for the Rio Grande.

Big issue: crops that consume lots of water such as alfalfa, cotton and pecans. Are large growers more interested in water rights with the aim of eventually “cornering the market” by controlling the supply of this precious commodity? This seems to be the motive behind the policy of Chuy Reyes, the General Manager of El Paso County Water Improvement District #1, his brother, Rep. Silvestre Reyes with the unwitting help of Senator Rodriguez of El Paso – the forces behind a new Texas State law that disenfranchised 75,000 voters, and made voter registration in the water district more onerous than many laws that once sought or now seek to deprive people of their civil right to vote.

Finally, Rick Lobello, the Education Curator at the El Paso Zoo, gave a talk recently to the new class of Texas Master Naturalists. One concept that is critical to urban planning is that of ecosystems services – the benefits that we derive from the ecosystem in which we live such as cleaner air, healthier soil, carbon sequestration, etc.. Learn more about it. Also, read a primer about ecosystem services from the United Nations Environment Program.

Conservation Easement, Petition, Water Improvement District

By now most all of you have heard that City Council last Tuesday (March 20^th) chose Dover Kohl’s Scenario #1 as its preference for a NW Master Plan. Scenario #1 includes development north and south of Transmountain but differs from the petitioners’ request to preserve land in a pre-defined rectangle. (Go here and here to see the different scenarios proposed by Dover Kohl.) Council’s choice was clearly a compromise although the compromise sought by Rep. Ann Lilly meant no development to the north but gave up a bit more land on the south. You can read about Council’s 5-3 decision at an elpasonaturally post and by reading Chris Roberts’ report in the El Paso Times.  What next?

Here’s the time line for moving the preferred scenario to an ordinance:

April 10th, City Council ordinance introduction

April 11^th, Tentative OSAB consideration of the conservation easement.
April 19th City Plan Commission hearing
May 1st, City Council public hearing

As I reported, the motion to adopt Scenario #1 included four caveats one of which was a conservation easement. It is this easement and how it is done that is the most concern to petitioners. I have spoken to a number of them now and most are disappointed with the selection of Scenario #1 but will call it a day if the conservation easement covers all of the open space in the new Master Plan and is a conservation easement not something else. Frontera Land Alliance, a non-profit land trust organization, has information online about such easements. EPWU spokespersons have made some rather misleading claims:

1.       Municipally owned lands can never be under a conservation easement. In fact, there are examples throughout the country and the State of Texas and in El Paso: Thunder Canyon.

2.       The concept of conservation easements came from the IRS. In fact, it comes from centuries old Common Law. It was in the 80s that Congress amended Section 170(h) of the IRS code to give tax credits to property owners for conservation easements.

3.       There is a difference between a conservation easement (for private land only if we are to believe the EPWU) and a “conservation covenant”. May be – but why re-invent the wheel unless the intent is to add an extra gear to control the wheel? For preservation to be in perpetuity, a third party is required. EPWU wants to administer a covenant. A fox would be glad to guard the hen house. Restrictive covenants do not work. Current best example: Blackie Chesher land which was given for the purpose of parkland and an attempt by EPWU/PSB to come up with the smoke and mirrors of this title and that title.  Two good reasons for a conservation easement: people don’t trust the government and the government doesn’t trust the government.

Bottom line: petitioners on the whole can live with the compromise. They will not abide anything but a conservation easement to preserve the land in perpetuity. Several (including myself) have said that, if there is no true conservation easement, new signatures will be gathered for an election immediately. At its Board meeting last Wednesday (March 21^st), the Franklin Mountains Wilderness Coalition members said the same thing. We should know before May 1^st whether to call it a day or hit the streets.

More points to ponder: the City owns double the land north of the NW Master Plan. The development in Scenario #1 is probably just the tip of an iceberg that could go far north. Perhaps a new petition addressing these lands north of the NW Master Plan? One would think that the new Comprehensive Plan (Plan El Paso) will pull back sprawl toward the City center and less to the outskirts (including protecting East El Paso). So perhaps a very expensive Paseo del Norte will be a road to nowhere.

Another immediate concern is the expansion of Transmountain into a freeway-like four lane road. This expansion is a monster. How much open space will be left north and south of Transmountain in the NW Master Plan area after TxDOT plows habitats and environment into oblivion? A thin sliver. A thin sliver.

There is a much bigger issue here that is critical. El Paso owns more land than there is water. And, if the Reyes team (Silvestre and Chuy) have their way with the collusion of State Senator José Rodríguez, a handful of landowners will control the supply of water in our City and region and not hundreds of thousands of people (you and me) in this County and beyond.

In a nutshell this is how it came down: In 2005, Senate Bill 547 (sponsored by a Senator from San Antonio and not our own Senator Shapleigh) attempted to prevent “75,000 El Pasoans from being eligible to vote in all elections involving the management and supervision of the El Paso County Water Improvement District.” Shapleigh put the kibosh on the bill and it failed. Exit Shapleigh. Enters Jose Rodríguez seemingly currying favor with U.S. Representative Silvestre Reyes (who is in a fight to keep his seat with Beto O’Rourke) and his brother, Jesus “Chuy” Reyes, General Manager of the El Paso County Water Improvement District #1. (The Water Improvement District owns 171,000 acre feet of water making it by far the largest water owner in El Paso. In fact, EPWID controls the water future of our region.) Also enters Rep. “Chente” Quintanilla who introduced a reincarnation of SB547 on the House side. Rodriquez introduced SB832 which passed the Texas Senate unanimously on 22 Mar 2011 and the Texas House unanimously on 14 Apr 2011.  Gov. Perry signed the bill 29 Apr 2011.  It became law on 1 Sep 2011. 

What does the law do? It disenfranchises 75,000 voters, requires voting registration just as onerous as many that have been recently proposed in State’s seeking to ID voters, and it puts the control of water in the District in the hands of a very few people. (See official EPWID voter information and registration.) What happens when supply is so narrowly restricted? I’ll bet many of you purchase some products and services that just go up and up in price. Why? Rather than many suppliers, you are now dealing with a very few or just one. We are already seeing (although the City and EPWU/PSB – which by the way endorsed SB832 – wear blinders) the effect of the Chuy Reyes EPWID Oligarchy – the Rio Bosque is going bone dry while down the river, reservoirs are full. Cost of your water in the future: Staggering. Keep your eyes on what’s happening with our water. We need a PSB that is a truly public board and accountable to the public and not one that marginalizes citizens. The issue of water supply and control has become more urgent with climate change. (There is a new PBS series on how people are coping with climate change.)

Remember that this Saturday (March 31^st) is the Annual Poppy Fest at the El Paso Museum of Archaeology. See the full schedule of events. Parking with shuttle service will be at 9570 Gateway Blvd. North, the EPCC Northeast campus. (Map)

On Sunday (April 1^st) Scenic Sunday hours will change from 6 a.m. until 11 a.m.  As you know, Scenic Drive is closed to vehicular traffic on Scenic Sundays and it is a great time to walk, bicycle, jog or run this 4.1 mile roundtrip with spectacular views of El Paso, Mexico, the surrounding mountains and 500 million year old fossils.

Finally, please watch this video!

Conservation Easements

By more than one expert, I have been told that a conservation easement is "an extremely flexible tool." I asked Richard Teschner, the man who helped save Resler Canyon and who is a Board member of the Frontera Land Alliance, a land conservation organization, to summarize a longer document about conservation easements. His summary also makes its application relevant to the situation with the El Paso Transmountain Scenic Corridor. Here is his summary:

Frontera Easement Summary

Click on "Fullscreen" to enlarge.

Overcoming Myths about Conservation Easements

Mike Gaglio, the President of the Frontera Land Alliance, sent out an email on Wednesday. At issue is a story on FOX News that misrepresented land trusts as eminent domain schemes to take land from private owners. In his letter he quotes from email news from the Land Trust Alliance. Here's is what he wrote:

Dear Frontera Supporters,

I want to alert you to an issue that may come as a surprise if you plan on speaking to property owners about conservation easements as a land preservation tool. Please be aware that there IS recent bad press about land trusts out there, however it is false, misinformation. On Feb 15th, Fox news aired a short piece in which land trusts and their activities were misrepresented as participating in eminent domain, working with government agencies to take land away from private property owners. This is simply not true. The following is an excerpt from the national Land Trust Alliance newsletter (copied below) about the issue. We at Frontera can provide correct information to interested land owners.

"On Monday, a Fox Cable News interview accused land trusts of working “in cahoots” with the government to condemn private property. This reckless misinformation has caused its own blizzard of outrage from the land trust community, and the Land Trust Alliance is working quickly to set the facts straight. Just another example of why we are stronger when we work together.

"On February 15, Fox Cable News broadcast an interview with Becky Norton Dunlop, vice president of external relations at The Heritage Foundation. In it, she states that land trusts are “in cahoots” with the federal government to take private property from unsuspecting landowners. While many of the statements made are untrue, this allegation has the potential to hurt the reputation of land trusts and land conservation.

"Alliance President Rand Wentworth is asking for a private meeting with Ms. Dunlop to discuss how land trusts respect private property rights, only enter into voluntary agreements, provide property owners with additional choices for preventing development on their land, do not participate in eminent domain, and, in fact, offer the kind of private sector action that is widely supported by majorities of both Republicans and Democrats. Times like these emphasize the need for the land trust community to build strong relationships with their representatives in Congress, as well as deep and wide support in their communities to ensure that private land conservation is impervious to misguided attacks.

"To reiterate, here are some talking points if you are contacted about this piece:

· Land trusts save land that provides important public benefits, including fresh water, clean air, local food and places to explore (or insert your particular benefits)

· Land trusts respect private property rights

· Conservation easements are private, voluntary agreements

· Land trusts do not participate in eminent domain actions

· Land trusts offer the kind of private sector action that is widely supported by majorities of both Republicans and Democrats"

Please feel free to contact me to discuss further if you like.

-Mike

The bad press from FOX makes it difficult for private owners to understand how land trusts can actually be advantageous to them.

In my recent Sunrise Hikers e-letter, I wrote this about an excursion to the A on the mountain:

“'A' Mountain is part of 588 acres of the privately owned land of the Coles. (Picture here.) The Coles have not been willing to discuss a sale of their land in order to preserve it as open space. They lease the ridge to communications companies purportedly for a substantial sum of money."

Gaglio responded:

"The beauty of a conservation easement is that the Cole's, would continue to own the land, they would continue to reap the benefits of the lease of their land to the tower/communications companies, AND they quite possibly would enjoy the federal income tax benefits of a charitable donation of a conservation easement on the surrounding land...an incentive that would reduce their federal income taxes related to the purported "substantial sum of money" they receive on the same land."

Sensational news stories such as the one that aired on FOX do not help.

Negotiations with land owners are often difficult because of the poor understanding about conservation easements. "In our experience so far, it is a very delicate and touchy process," Mike Gaglio tells me. "The word 'conservation' rings in the ears of some with skepticism and sometimes disgust, inciting visions of eminent domain and other myths."

Mike is a co-owner of High Desert: Environmental Consulting and Native Plants.

Land Trusts for Food Farmers in El Paso?

I will be attending the "Taste of Frontera" tonight - the annual fundraising dinner for the Frontera Land Alliance. It will be held at my favorite restaurant - Ardovino's Desert Crossing in Anapra, New Mexico.

The Frontera Land Alliance has been very involved with preserving and restoring "critically important natural land resources in the El Paso region." Its members have been intimately involved in rescuing arroyos, creating a mountain to river trail, changing ordinances, preserving open space - indeed helping to create the open space policies of the City of El Paso and the stormwater master plan.

One interest that I have in the group is the possibility of creating land trusts to help preserve farmland in the City of El Paso - a city sprawling in every possible direction. If we are to have local food, we have to have local farmers.

The Treasurer of Frontera, Charlie Wakeem, told me this:

"There have been many efforts to preserve farms in the Upper and Lower Valleys.
The Frontera Land Alliance (the local land trust) has tried to educate small farmers in the area about the advantages of conservation easements. Conservation easements have been successful on working lands, both farms and ranches,
throughout the country. Problem is, our valleys are too close to a rapidly growing urban community - El Paso, TX. Developers offer them many times the value of their land so they can develop them. It's all about $$$$$$. If a farm is worth $3,000.00 per acre and the farmer is offered $30,000.00 per acre and you were the farmer just barely squeaking out a living growing corn, what would you do?"

Just what is a conservation easement? It "is a legal agreement that limits the amount of development that can occur on a property. A landowner partners with a land trust organization to set up this agreement. Conservation easements are very flexible. In return for agreeing not to develop the land, a private landowner may be compensated either by a direct payment or a tax write-off."

A good source of information and strategies to preserve farm land can be found at American Farmland Trust.