Information and Discussion Only Please

Want to know what is going on with the Open Space Advisory Board (OSAB) these days? Nothing. For nearly a year now the agenda has been hijacked by the Planning Department bureaucracy. Read: Larry Nichols, Director of Planning. Read: Tommy Gonzalez, part-time City Manager. Although OSAB is charged with advising City Council regarding the Open Space Master Plan and acquisitions of open space, members of OSAB are no longer in the position (at least through their meetings) to advise. Why? Most every item on the OSAB agenda is for "Information and Discussion" only. No ACTION. 

In advance of the most recent meeting the Chair, Lois Balin, sent Planning a final agenda with every item marked "Discussion and Action". It got changed—changed from the top—changed by Larry Nichols. A major OSAB concern has long been the revised Natural Open Space zoning ordinance. Last November in a meeting with Chair Lois Balin and myself as Vice-Chair, Larry Nichols promised to move the NOS item forward. At this point his words must be considered to have been misleading.

The Board should be setting its own agenda and Planning should be assisting. Instead it is the tail wagging the dog. 

So where is Open Space money going (that 10% of the stormwater fee that you pay) plus all that Quality of Life bond money? Try park ponds and, I suspect, other non-Open Space budgetary matters.

El Paso County Moving Ahead with Trail Initiative

El Paso County is hard at work on an inititative for a county-line to county-line trail system. They are seeking funding from the Paso del Norte Health Foundation. A form letter to the Foundation's Selection Committee that businesses, organizations and individuals have begun to personalize and sign reads:

"El Paso County residents have long recognized the need to increase access to outdoor quality of life amenities in our community.  And community leaders have also long recognized the connection between outdoor amenities like parks and trails to physical health, community engagement and even economic development.  A county-line to county-line trail that allows for walking, running, hiking and exploring would add to our inventory of outdoor recreation and promote outdoor activity that our residents could benefit from.  It could link the river to other natural waterways and drains; it could connect historic trails and sites to existing green space and parks; it would create connectivity between our two diverse valleys, underserved communities and areas in between."

The Open Space Advisory Board has been discussing a trail system for several years now but the Parks and Recreation Department seems to be stuck on the process for actually creating that trail system. They need to be focused on producting the product. It sounds like the County is focused on just that.

The El Paso County Historical Commission chaired by Bernie Sargent has been a leader in promoting the preservation and promotion of historical sites in El Paso. (Find the Historical Commission's Facebook page HERE.) By linking heritage tourism with open space, recreational opportunities for El Pasoans will increase El Paso's quality of health and be a magnet for greater economic growth in our Sun City.

RIP New Urbanism in El Paso

There are several reasons. First, in 2013 voters, upset by the city's financing of the ballpark and other issues, elected a regressive City Council. In many respects it is the best Council ever bought and paid for by developers of land mainly in east El Paso. Following that election, the new Council hired Tommy Gonzalez to be the City Manager. Pushed by powerful players such as Ted Houghton, more miles of freeways and freeway loops have been built and will continue to be built and expanded over the next few years as westsiders know all too well. Freeways create sprawl. Rather than boulevards, we built freeways. Why? So we could move construction equipment and materials more easily around the city in order to build more developments and eventually more freeways not to mention ticky-tacky strip malls. The trend has been away from smart growth, Plan El Paso, building codes which could have encouraged sustainable, energy-efficient housing and soon-to-be changes to the landscape ordinance.

Note how Plan El Paso appears on the city web site. Scroll through the first few pages and you will see unreadable gibberish. 

Along with clamping down against New Urbanism, the new "regime" has now opened the doors to a new El Paso brain drain. Many of the city's best and brightest city planners are beginning to look at work outside of El Paso. 

The new regime has also stymied work by the Open Space Advisory Board. Recommendations are held up. The new Director of Planning has covertly taken over what will and won't be on agendas. Agenda items today are largely for "information" rather than discussion and action.

What can be done? It goes without saying that we need more innovative, progressive policy makers on Council. It also means that we all need to become aware of city codes and work to change those that lead to unsustainablility and the destruction of our environment. Especially it means that as consumers we begin to choose other options for housing, neighborhoods, connectivity, walkability and transportaion. If they build it, they will come? No, if the sprawlers want to sprawl, let's have nothing to do with it except to do everything that we can to limit it and regulate it. Then let's build better and smarter.

El Paso's Natural Open Space: Some Questions for Policymakers and Citizens

Just words on a sign. The picture was taken in 2010. What progress has been made on the Palisades open space since then? Ask the taggers not the City.

[The following was written by elpasonaturally reader, Marshall Carter-Tripp. Not only are her points and questions thought-provoking, they represent the frustratioon that many citizens have with the open space policies of the City of El Paso. elpasonaturally had always looked at the Boulder, Colorado ordinances as the best examples of controlling sprawl and preserving open space. Do not expect the any strides in a similar direction from the current reactionary El Paso City Council. To do the right thing will require a sea change in the next two City Council elections in which conservation-minded persons are elected and the sprawler puppets retired.

The Open Space Advisory Board meets tomorrow, September 2nd, at 3PM in City Building 3, 801 Texas Avenue, in the unmarked Thorman Conference Room in the basement. The meeting is open to the public and there is a public comment section at the beginning of the meeting for any item not on the agenda.]

Through the PSB stormwater set-aside and the City of El Paso’s Quality of Life funding for Open Space acquisition, El Paso can preserve hundreds of acres of undeveloped Open Space, for the benefit of those who live here – humans and wildlife.  This effort began with City Council approval in late February 2007 of a master plan entitled ”Towards a Bright Future: A Green Infrastructure Plan for El Paso, Texas” (the Open Space Master Plan). A few months later the Plan was awarded the Excellence in Planning Award from the National Association of Recreation Resource Planners (This plan, unfortunately, is no longer readily available on the internet.)   Implementation moved slowly; Council created an Open Space Advisory Board some two and a half years later, in June 2009.   This Board makes recommendations to Council about priorities under the master plan.  It has no authority to require that any action take place; even its ability to discuss various is limited. 

The, perhaps inevitable, result is that Natural Open Space is not a priority for city management and the goals laid out in the Master Plan do not appear to be incorporated into city staff activity.  For example, the Open Space Master Plan calls for expansion of Keystone Heritage Park (as does the City’s Parks Master Plan).  In July 2012 the Open Space Advisory Board progress report noted that the city had purchased 29 acres south of Keystone Dam, which could be used to buffer Keystone.  But in early February 2015, supporters of Keystone learned that the city’s Environmental Services was planning to build a large trash collection site on this land. The possibility that the land in question might contain unexplored cultural resources had not been investigated.   Leaving aside the considerable noise and debris inherent in a trash collection station, which could seriously affect the quality of a visit to Keystone, the decision to build it meant that the Keystone expansion goal could not be realized.  The city had already taken no action to buy land to the north of the park, land that was now under development.

Taking a second example, the Palisades Canyon land acquired by the PSB once it had the purchasing power (the Master Plan had considered it too expensive to list it as a key goal).  Hikers and bikers had visited these 202 acres for many years, despite the “no trespassing” signs.  Usage expanded once the parcel was purchased by the PSB in 2010 and a “welcome to the Palisades” sign was installed.  Nearby residents noted, however, that many of the users did not adhere to the announced rules, such as dogs on leashes, and no private motorized vehicles.  Graffiti appeared along the trail and was not removed, even after requests were made to the streets and maintenance graffiti unit. (The city’s website asserts that graffiti removal is done in public spaces, specifically citing parks.  Apparently because the Palisades is not a park, and the graffiti cannot be seen from the street, removing it is not important.)  Trucks and other vehicles go up the trail almost every day, now apparently to service the transmission tower at the end of Sierra Crest, built in mid-2015.  These are not PSB vehicles; who granted an easement for this traffic?  How much such traffic could be tolerated in Natural Open Space? No city agency takes responsibility for what happens in the Palisades – the “official owner,” the PSB, has no component to supervise Open Space, and the Parks and Recreation Department will only occupy itself with the trailhead, once constructed.  To date even a doggy bag dispenser is lacking.  (And as the Palisades is not a city park, the dog waste ordinance would not apply, so could fines be levied?) 

The city has not supplied staff for other components of the Open Space inventory.  Keystone land is owned by the city, but it has been entirely built and maintained by a private charity, and public outreach is through its Friends of Keystone group.  Similarly, the Rio Bosque wetlands, now owned by the PSB, are managed by UTEP, and a private non-profit Friends group manages public involvement.  Park Partnerships are available for designated city parks, for help with equipment, maintenance and cleanup, but these Natural Open Space areas are not city parks.

Let’s consider what has been done in some other southwestern/western cities.  Boulder is perhaps the poster child for Open Space protection.  Voters there approved a city charter amendment in 1959 that restricted the provision of city services to development below a certain altitude, protecting the mountain from development.   In 1967 the citizens of Boulder followed with a special sales tax to provide revenue for Open Space.  Boulder County then created a Parks and Open Space Department, now celebrating its 40th anniversary.  Key to its operation is a partnership arrangement in which businesses, civic groups, and individuals provide financial and volunteer support to monitor and care for the 100,000 acres plus of Open Space now preserved in Boulder County.

http://www.bouldercounty.org/os/getinvolved/pages/ospartnership.aspx
https://bouldercountyopenspace.org/40/

Nearer home, Albuquerque has nearly 30,000 acres of city-owned Open Space, based on the 1988 comprehensive city plan, complete with Visitor Center!  (And there are many more neighboring acres under state or federal control.) Volunteer programs allow for “adoption” of particular Open Space, and the Open Space Alliance serves as a “Friends of Open Space” group.  Albuquerque’s land is managed by a division within the Parks and Recreation Department.  The management principles are to: 

• Conserve Natural and archaeological resources; 
• Provide opportunities for outdoor education; 
• Provide a place for low impact recreation (in some but not all of the Open Space land), and
• Define the edges of the urban environment. 

https://www.cabq.gov/parksandrecreation/open-space


Looking at these success stories, we in El Paso might ask ourselves:

#1  Where does the acquisition of Open Space fit in Council’s Strategic Plan, if it does?  What concern, if any, is there for conservation of El Paso’s unique asset, the mountain range, excluding further development on it?

#2  Is there a schedule for acquisition of land, and what is the goal in terms of acres?  (El Paso is fortunate to have the Franklin Mountains State Park, nearly 25,000 acres, comprising the largest urban park in the country. But these acres are not enough!)  Should Council consider setting aside at least one meeting a year to review progress and remind staff of the Open Space and Parks Master Plans? 

#3  What might trigger creation of an Open Space division, with staff, in the Parks and Recreation Department?  And associated programs for partners for Open Space or Friends of particular Open Space areas?  (The Parks Department page on the city website shows Marci Tuck as the Open Space, Trails and Parks Coordinator.  Ms Tuck left the department in mid-May, 2015.  Apparently her role is not important enough to replace.   In any case she had no responsibility for open space per se, just connections through trailheads.)

#4  How are citizens to interact with the OSAB and the PSB regarding land acquisition or other Open Space concerns if they cannot attend the daytime meetings and speak during the Call to the Public?  Who determines how much of the PSB Open Space fund is used for Park Ponds rather than the purchase of Natural Open Space?  How can citizens affect these decisions?

- Marshall Carter-Tripp

An Open Letter to All Those Who Attended OSAB Yesterday

"We the People" begin to gather for yesterday's Open Space Advisory Board meeting.

To all of you great people who attended the Open Space Board meeting yesterday and spoke out during the call to the public:

I've said it before and I'll say it again: "Leadership for real change must begin with We the People. We cannot afford to be complacent and disorganized any longer." I wrote that in a blog post apologizing to the Knapps and saying that they have every right to develop their land and have no choice but to do so since they have found no accommodation with the city after six years of trying. The land has value and it is taxable.

On the other hand, I hope that they don't develop. They like you and me value our mountainsides. It's not them. It's the city and the politics of the city. Money for open space is drained for pork barrel projects, the park ponds. Money evaporates because of bureaucratic failures. Money protects the monied interests and not the interests of the public. Who pays for it? You and me. Just look at your ridiculous property taxes. If you are a business person, just look at all the waste caused by onerous city rules and regulations. If our city politicians had the will to do what is right and not what is in the interest of their big contributors, we could do more with improving our infrastructure, preserving our natural treasures of mountains, desert and wetlands, and restoring our historic buildings. 

People spoke out.

Each of you yesterday took a giant leap for that leadership for real change. "We the People" came to OSAB yesterday.

As a member of that board and as someone who wants to see real change in this city, I was elated by your presence. You were not there in vain. Although the issue of the Sierra del Puente development was not on the agenda, it has been an item of discussion before. You came to discuss your real concerns during the call to the public which was perfectly appropriate. Since Sierra del Puente and the Stoney Hill property are open spaces with clear stormwater functions, you came to the right place. Also, just the fact that you came - nearly a 100 of you - has already sent a message to city government. You spoke truth loudly to power.

Mayor Cook and Chris Cummings were right. The next step is to call your representatives. Rep. Carl Robinson was there and said that he was already working with the Mayor on the issue. State Rep. Joe Moody urged board members to discuss the issue with the representatives who appointed them. I sure plan to speak with Claudia Ordaz, a great public servant.

Your points were good ones: the concern about flooding, overcrowding of already overcrowded schools, protection of the viewshed and access to the State Park, protection of wildlife including endangered or protected wildlife and protecting your homes from damage caused by preparing that rough landscape for development.

You made your points. You were in the right place. You will take the next steps. Work with the Knapps. Work with your Neighborhood Associations. Work with Franklin Mountains Wilderness Coalition. Work with the City. After yesterday, you have their ears. Be ceaseless and enthusiastic. 

elpasonaturally is with you. Make this your podium too.

For those of you who draw inspiration from books of scripture, here's the beginning of the 121st Psalm:

"I lift up my eyes to the mountains—
    where does my help come from?
My help comes from the Lord, 
the Maker of heaven and earth."

Lift up your eyes to the mountains. There is inspiration and motivation right there.


Please support elpasonaturally©. Go HERE to donate and help turn El Paso "green".

Save Our Sierras

[A new group has formed: Save Our Sierras. It consists of neighbors below the proposed Sierra del Puente and Stoney Hills developments. Franklin Mountains Wilderness Coalition is sending out a call to action in their newest e-letter. Below is a list of actions and how you can help.]

Development Next to Mountainside Neighborhood

Are you ready for a swath of new houses between your home and our Franklin Mountains?  The heirs to Dick Knapp are working on development plans for the hundreds of acres they own between McKelligon Canyon and Hondo Pass.  You may have seen bulldozers and graders “improving” roads so that surveyors will have access.  Land owners are carefully abiding by all regulations and are within their rights.

However, development of our pristine mountain sides is NOT inevitable.  Creation of our Franklin Mountains State Park (FMSP) in 1979 and preservation of Kern View Estates II in April of this year demonstrate that citizen action can result in critical land conservation.

To protect our mountains, all neighbors must organize and take action to inform City officials of their desire that the land at the eastern edge of the Franklin Mountains State Park remain in its natural state. 

Please attend the next Open Space Advisory Board meeting and bring your friends and neighbors.  Anyone can speak during “Call to the Public.”  The agenda should include items related to this development.

Wednesday, August 5th, 2015, 3:00 P.M.

City 3 Building, 801 Texas Avenue

Basement, Thorman Conference Room

Other options to TAKE ACTION:

1.      Join the Mountainside Neighborhood Association.

2.      Join the Franklin Mountains Wilderness Coalition at FranklinMountains.org.

3.      Stay informed with blogs such as ElPasoNaturally.com.

4.      Attend meetings such as City Council and Open Space Advisory Board.

5.      Make your voice heard!

YOU can help save our sierras!

To sign the petition and for more information contact judy Ackerman, jpackerman53@gmail.com, 915-755-7371.

Please support elpasonaturally©. Go HERE to donate and help turn El Paso "green".

Sierra del Puente Protest Begins

The backlash against plans to develop Sierra del Puente has begun. A number of people from surrounding Mountain Park and other neighborhoods gathered yesterday to view the area behind their homes where a stack and pack development will most assuredly obscure their view of the mountains. 

Some initial organizing began.

There are some lingering questions the biggest of which is why the Open Space Advisory Board never set this land as a priority and pursued buying it? It had been mentioned by OSAB members on several occasions. Why was there no staff follow through? Will the City be interested as they seem to be in land near Mesa Heights?

Stay tuned on this one, folks.

Who's To Blame for Trash Collection Site Next to Keystone?

These water fowl do not know that the City of El Paso has only put the trash collection site next to their habitat on hold . . . for now.

Although officials from Tommy Gonzalez down say that the nasty, dirty, ugly trash collection site next to Keystone (open space, wildlife preserve, archaeological site and botanical gardens) Park is on hold, they always add "for now" or "in the near future" or "for the time being". Rep. Niland claims that nobody in her district (District 1) has complained about the station. Of course, she only listens to a few Country Club Facebook friends as she did with our Christmas Tree in the San Jacinto Park when she wanted to take it down or destroy it by pruning it in a more triangular shape. Ask the people of the Upper Valley Neighborhood Association. Ask the parishioners of St. Jude's what they think about the collection station next to them. They are outraged. It's not just a bunch of tree huggers, animal lovers, heritage hippies who are angry.

Now we learn that the District 8 Rep along with the District 1 Rep want to put the blame on Ellen Smyth, the Director of Environmental Services. The truth is that Ms. Smyth was doing her job - the Reps of District 8 and District 1 were ignoring the situation for four years! Joyce Wilson, the perfecter of closed door deals, took money from the Environmental Services as part of the land swap that procured the City of El Paso the land next to Keystone. Naturally, Ms. Smyth saw this as land for her department's use. Now that there is a big brouhaha, Ms. Niland and Ms. Lily are calling for Smyth's head rather than acknowledging their responsibility. It is akin to a drunk driver who is oblivious to what's happening on the road and, thus, causing an accident and then blaming it on the sober driver. 

The Open Space Advisory Board will discuss and take action on the whole issue of a collection station next to Keystone at their next meeting, April 1st at 3 PM at City Hall #3, 801 N. Texas (red brick building at the corner of Texas and Virginia) in the Thorman Conference Room (downstairs). MAP

There is an online petition as well as a petition circulating through the Upper Valley Neighborhood Association and St. Jude's. 

Such a site does not belong next to an open space with a wetlands and animal habitat, an archaeological site, a neighborhood and a church. How would people feel if it was put next to St. Matthew's or St. Mark's in the Upper Valley or St. Clement's downtown. Hmmm?

City Strategic Plan Has Nothing to Say about the Environment and Open Space

Our beautiful mountains are being ravaged by quarries like the Cemex operation near McKelligon Canyon.

The City of El Paso's strategic plan has nothing to say about the environment and open space. Although it may be a useful document for staff, it does not address the issues about conservation and preservation of our natural resources. 

At their meeting this past Wednesday members of the Open Space Advisory Board (OSAB) heard a presentation by Nancy Bartlett of the City Manager's office about the strategic plan. Questions were immediately raised.

Board member, Maria Teran, asked if OSAB fitted into one of the strategic plan initiatives. Both Bartlett and a cohort also from the CM's office were hard pressed to find an item that might include open space. To say the least, I haven't heard this much hemming and hawing by city personnel in a long time.

Former OSAB Chairman and current Board member, Charlie Wakeem said it quite plainly after all the hemming and hawing: "Nothing I've heard has tied this plan to the open space plan."

You can read the strategic plan HERE. Ms. Bartlett tried to tie open space with 3.2 of the plan: "Improve the visual impression of the community." OSAB members weren't buying it.

When questioned as to how the general public, boards and commissions had been involved in the formation of the strategic plan, Bartlett claimed that the public had been invited to a City Council hearing. It was pointed out that, if true, no real notice about the hearing was given. A friend commented: "I joined the city mailing list in May 2014, I never received any notice of public meetings on the strategic plan that I recall."

Not being able to detail public participation in the plan, Bartlett then claimed that the SP is a work in progress and her coming to OSAB was a beginning. However, that doesn't explain the fact that a slick brochure with the plan has already been printed. Why go to the expense of designing and printing a brochure if the SP is still a "work in progress"?

What it means that the environment, open space and conservation are not mentioned is easy: the heirarchy of the City doesn't value the environment, open space and conservation. 

They should.

More on the Keystone-Trash Collection Controversy

Photo from keystoneheritagepark.org

Yesterday at the Open Space Advisory Board meeting, a representative from the City Manager's office said that the Collection Station project was on hold and that it wasn't "happening at this time." That is the same message that other city officials are giving: it's on hold for the foreseeable future . . . but just wait. Although both Charlie Wakeem and myself requested in February that a discussion and action item about the collection station be part of yesterday's agenda, it was deleted from that agenda at the insistence of Rep. Cortney Niland. As we were considering the April agenda, I moved that the item be on our April agenda. That motioned was seconded and the motion passed unanimously. I made it clear that this was a motion approved and not a "request" or a "suggestion" and that I expected it on the April agenda. The matter is not dead and OSAB should weigh in. Creating a park next to Keystone or conserving that land in some other way makes the most sense to me. El Paso adopted smart code a couple of years ago. Since when does one put an industrial park next to a wetlands? The whole matter of incompatible zoning will also be discussed at the next meeting - another motion that was seconded and passed unanimously and that should not be trumped by Chair or Secretary or a Council Representative.

At yesterday's meeting, Marilyn Guida made the following statement suggesting that the matter must be dealt with now:

The City of El Paso Environmental Services Department is proposing to construct a Citizen Collection Station as part of a larger Municipal Service Center at Doniphan and Kappa on the West side.

This facility will be located a stone’s throw south of the wonderful 52 acre natural and cultural resource preserve called Keystone Heritage Park (KHP).  This is city-owned land developed and managed by the Keystone Heritage Park Board. It includes the nine acre Keystone Archaeological Preserve. The preserve protects a State Archaeological Landmark and National Register prehistoric site, the Keystone Dam Archaeological Site.

There are potential, probable (probable meaning more likely than possible) undiscovered prehistoric cultural resources that may be on the city-owned land south of and outside the KHP fence.  

The Keystone Dam Archaeological Site is a nationally significant site. If the area around this site is degraded, it can endanger the status of the site for the National Register. In other words, the Keystone Dam Archaeological Site can be delisted from the National Register.  

This is the oldest site of its size, indicating an organized community, in Middle Archaic times (approx. 4,000 to 1,200 B.C.) north of the Mexican border in the Southwest.

The predominant native Chihuahuan Desert plants in that area are Four Wing Salt Bush and Mesquite, both of which were important food plants for the ancient people as well as having many other ancient uses. The presence of these plants are often reliable indicators of prehistoric cultural resources.

Before they do any land disturbance the City has to comply with state law to determine if any undiscovered prehistoric cultural resources are located there.  There are procedures within the Texas Historical Commission for complying with state law regarding cultural resources and archaeological sites.

Also of importance is the open space potential of that site, to expand upon the existing KHP. Any newly discovered cultural resources could be preserved and monitored within designated open space.

The term cultural resources is preferable to the term “archaeological site.” Archaeology is a methodology for learning about the past. The cultural resources are what connect us to the people of the past and how they lived. It’s about the ancient people, not the archaeologists.  The laws are written using the term cultural resources or specifying that the law is about recovering information about culture. 

With a focus on ancient people, we also need to recognize that we have people living today in El Paso who trace their heritage to the ancient people. Thus we need to bring those descendants into the process of discussing what to do about prehistoric cultural resources. I am speaking of Ysleta del Sur Pueblo people (The Tigua Tribe) and the Piro-Manso-Tigua Tribe of Las Cruces which includes families in El Paso and Juarez.

The 1996 Parks & Open Space plan recommended that all the land east of Doniphan from Sunset Drive to Sunland Park Drive be open space – 105 acres.

In the most recent Open Space Plan, that area shrank to the land north of KHP. Now the land north of KHP is being built up. 

Today, in 2015, the only open space left between KHP and Sunland Park Drive is this city-owed land that Environmental Services is proposing for development.

The City Council should be encouraged to make a final formal determination on use of the site south of KHP.  As long as no final decision is made there is no guarantee of what will happen to that area. 

Leaving that property as it is now invites the potential for illegal dumping, for vehicles driving around off paved roads, for camping by homeless people, for illegal activities, etc. This endangers the cultural and natural resources as well as the safety and security of KHP and the neighboring uses including a church and residential area.

Some final determination must be made as soon as possible.  The City Council should dedicate that land to open space.



Please sign the petition and ask your friends and family to do the same.

The Gloves Are Off

City Council's land grab is becoming more and more obvious. It entails destroying your Public Service Board, the very people who have made sure that all of us who live in this desert city even in the midst of drought have water. Why the land grab? So that they can sell off land in little bits at a time to the sprawlers who are funding their campaign coffers and pulling their strings. What we have now is no longer a representation of us, but an autocracy of a very few people with the greedy intent of getting richer and richer. Damn our children and grandchildren and their children. Let them thirst, they say. Their profit now is all that matters.

Let me give you four examples of the land grab. Pay attention El Paso Times, El Paso Inc., El Paso Diario, KVIA, KTSM, et. al. especially to this first one:

First, Council's most egregious and covert attempt occurred at last Tuesday's City Council meeting. There was a strategic effort made by Rep. Cortney Niland to put control of all PSB managed land under the control of City Council by amending the language in a bond issuance proposed by the PSB. PSB bonds are backed by the assets of the utility pledged as collateral. In the bond language the PSB is referred to as the "system". Niland wants the land NOT to be part of the system but under the control of City Council. The problem with that is the fact that bondholders could then sue the city because there would no longer be collateral backing the bonds. The solution proposed was to alter the language in the bond issuance to prevent bondholders from having grounds to sue. 

24 hours before Council Sylvia Firth, who works directly under the Mayor, announced this new language. In executive session, the Bond Counsel, Paul Braden convinced City Council that it was impossible to make this change with only 24 hours notice. The language was dropped and the usual language remained. HOWEVER, we can expect Niland, et. al. to be better prepared in 6 or 8 months when more bond issuances go to Council.

Know that Niland has been heard in public that she does not care about EPWU's prestige for being one of the best water utilities in the country, she wants the utility to be under the direct control of Council so that our land can be sold for revenue. Her shortsighted plan is completely contrary to the vision for having an independent PSB/EPWU in the first place - a vision that has led successfully to our having water and water at a very low rate. (Those rates will still be lower than the average rates across the country even if it should go up another 8 percent or so. And remember, businesses, that it was Council not the PSB who levied that exorbitant franchise tax - I mean "fee" - on you and not the PSB.)

Second, Council's most egregious and overt action to destroy the PSB and grab land for their sprawler masters occurred just two hours ago. They appointed the third-rated candidate (Bradley Roe) over the first-rated and current PSB member, David Nemir. Why? Refuse the Juice said it the best in a post just minutes after the vote: "[Roe is] clearly a pick that will vote to sell all of the PSB land to home builders in tiny parcels so that parks don't have to be included . . . among other amenities. Smart code is out the door with this guy."

"The fix was in" as Refuse the Juice explained. As soon as the candidates were introduced, Lilly Limon moved to accept Roe. She did her part. It was all orchestrated beforehand. Only Rep. Robinson and Rep. Ordaz voted against the motion for Roe.

Thirdly, last March 18th City Council seemed poised to jettison smart development from the Northwest Master Plan - a plan forged by the efforts of so many El Pasoans. Their efforts were thwarted by an outcry by many of us and they reaffirmed (at least for now) that Master Plan. It bears vigilant watching however.

And finally, the recent attempt to take money from that portion of the stormwater fee dedicated to buying and preserving natural open space for flood control projects was a means of undermining not just the PSB but the Open Space Advisory Board. As an OSAB member I took the position that we could afford to be part of the City's efforts to help flood control. I was wrong. Many of you told me before that I was wrong and now you hear me saying it. It was an attempt to undermine the PSB by taking that decision away from them. It was an attempt to undermine the Open Space Advisory Board by setting the precedent that open space money is merely a slush fund. Hopefully the matter is dead as I posted last week. I can tell you that, when several of us were first invited by the Mayor to his office to discuss his proposal, I asked whether he had spoken to John Balliew about the proposal. Surprisingly he hadn't and he seemed to be caught off guard by my question. He promised to do so but I bet he wouldn't have had I never asked the question. I'll use another post to relate how we were sold a car. For now, know that I will ask that the matter be put back on the OSAB agenda so that we can rescind our recommendation.

I like to get along and always give the other side the benefit of the doubt and believe that win-win solutions are always best. I believe that there is good in each and every person. However, the beliefs, habits and practices of the El Paso autocracy (and the fact that they are an autocracy) - the sprawlers and their Council lackeys (who I will stop referring to as "representatives" because they don't represent the people) - are shortsighted and simply bad for our future. I will for awhile be posting daily about this land grab and the machinations of the autocracy. I can't be nice any longer. 

The gloves are off. It's time to fight back. El Pasoans are about to step up. Save our water. Save our land. Save our PSB.

Correcting a Misstatement and Focusing on the Real Concerns

I misstated something in yesterday's post and I need to make a correction for the record. In a post published just yesterday but meant for last Friday, I wrote: "Not long ago, City Councilwoman, Cortney Niland, was heard to say that the City needed $3.2 Million to keep a promise made to developers. Amazing how that $3.2 Million is exactly what she and the Mayor propose to take from that portion of the stormwater fee meant to go to open space over the next couple of years." 

I checked my source because the item regarding the $3.2 Million for open space being re-directed comes up tomorrow. I was corrected. Ms. Niland made the statement in regards to an earlier decision by Council to charge businesses an extra fee on their water-sewer bills for road repairs. That amount was $3.5 Million. Ms. Niland was trying to find a means to address a budget short fall while providing a source of money to improve the pace of permitting by contractors with the City and thus reducing wait time. I did not inquire about the particulars.

Tomorrow's agenda item 13.2 does have to do with the use of the ten percent of stormwater fees that would normally go to the purchase of open space. Instead, over the next two years up to $3.2 Million will be diverted to flood water construction projects. The ordinance language (click on supporting document HERE) is quite specific and is in harmony with what the Open Space Advisory Board recommended: up to $3.2 Million over the next year (nothing more and it could be less) will be spent for these projects. Furthermore, the money does not get transferred to the City. It remains on the Stormwater ledger under the control of the Public Service Board. 

As a member of the Open Space Advisory Board I also voted to recommend. Quite frankly, it was the best thing to do noting five things: Open space priorities are being acquired or are in the act of acquisition. Second, there will be $800,000 in the open space account after the acquisitions. Third, we don't have a Council generally favorable to conservation at this time. (That $3.2 Million could have been nearly $5 Million more without our discussions with the Mayor.) Fourth, the language of the ordinance is as we discussed. All is honest and above board. Finally, OSAB only advises and recommends. The City Council passes ordinances.

I understand that some of you disagree with the recommendation but keep in mind that there are more critical concerns. One of them may be in item 8.1 on tomorrow's agenda. I'll cut to the chase. Read page 25. (Click on supporting document HERE.) My sources (far better than the $3.2 Million one) tell me that the City Attorney may have made a substantial re-write at the last minute without any notice. We will see tomorrow. At issue is who controls bonding and land sales and all of that - the PSB or this City Council bought and paid for by the El Paso sprawlers. 

The really critical issues: keeping the PSB in control and conserving more land.

As conservationists, let's work together on the critical issues which really count.

So what happened?

Yesterday by a vote of 6-1 OSAB recommended to City Council that the 10% of the stormwater fee for open space/stormwater projects be diverted to immediate flood control projects. Two points: the key words in the recommendation (and in the Mayor's proposal) are "up to $3.2 million". That is the amount that, under the current stormwater fee, will be collected over the next two years for open space. In our conversations with the Mayor and again at yesterday's OSAB meeting, I wanted to make it clear that we were only talking about the $3.2 million and not more revenue expected because the stormwater fee is most certainly going to be raised. The Mayor was on hand to give his presentation (a first as far as I know for a Mayor to come to the Board) and he personally stated that his request was for what will be collected in 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 under the current rate. The rest he assured us goes into the open space coffers. 

The second point is this: much of what OSAB has sought to preserve as natural open space with stormwater function has now closed or soon will close. There is money on hand. Making this so is largely the result of EPWU attorney Lupe Cuellar's efforts for which she is to be showered with kudos. Here is her report from yesterday:


Click on the icon with the 4 arrows at bottom right to enlarge and scroll.

Save Cement Lake

El Paso's best kept secret - a natural lake just north of Executive Blvd. not far from Sunland Park

The best kept secret in El Paso is (Portland) Cement Lake. Probably the vast majority of El Pasoans don't know about this treasure as they speed along I-10 just north of Executive Blvd. It was one of the top priorities for acquisition in the City's Open Space Master Plan (p. 5-44). About the lake that Plan states, "the existing lake is fed by area springs, and maintains an unusual wetlands ecosystem that is physically separated from the Rio Grande. The pond and surrounding vegetation is visible from I-10 and is the one green area in an otherwise heavily industrialized area."

The Franklins in the background

Fed by area springs from the Franklins?! Amazing. Definitely should be preserved. 

from Land Arts of the American West

Unusual wetlands ecosystem?! Amazing. Definitely should be preserved. 

Did the City acquire it from its previous owner Cemex? Nope. Who did? You had better sit down. TxDOT did! 

TxDOT did so along with plenty more acreage in an area where yet more interchanges will go along with what land is leftover that they hope to develop. It is rumored that they purchased the land for $35,000 an acre. That makes the 50 acres of Cement Lake worth $1.75 Million.  Of course preserving the wetlands would require land for connectivity and a buffer zone. 

Is there money in the Open Space budget to procure the land? Maybe not for there may already be recommended commitments by the increasingly non-transparent and secretive OSAB to purchase three other properties - all of which together do not even approach the value of a natural, spring-fed lake with an unusual wetlands ecosystem.

Click to enlarge. Preserve the lake? Preserve the arroyos?

Reportedly, TxDOT would like to Master Plan the area. (Perhaps be advised by Plan El Paso pp. 1.21, 4.3, 4.60, 4.61?) District Engineer Robert Bielek has let it be known that, to get the ball rolling on a Master Plan, an official letter from the City or PSB (or even a Council member?) is all that it would take. elpasonaturally knows that the Mayor and EPWU's John Balliew are in discussion. But a letter?

One of the principal reasons for all the blood-letting at Lincoln Center was the failure to have a comprehensive discussion with all the stakeholders early on. (Too many plans that had to be kept behind a few closed doors.) In the case of Cement Lake, Bielek and TxDOT are letting it be known that they want to talk and plan ahead.

Noting that "green" is the bottom item of TxDOT's priorities (just below history and heritage and way below public art doodads on overpasses), the question is this: Will conservationists, wildlife officials, open space advocates and so forth be part of this discussion? Part of the team to preserve the natural lake as part of a Master Plan? As of right now, the doors are closed. The lips are sealed. The Open Records Requests are being drafted.

But consider, the Cement Lake Wetlands preserved would make a peaceful place to visit from the historic Barrio Buena Vista, Executive Blvd., Monticillo on the Ridge, anywhere in El Paso and the surrounding region - a green getaway for meditative peace and wildlife study not to mention ecotourism - much like Keystone Park. 

But will El Paso have the vision?

See also:

Basecamp El Paso's Wild swimming in the Portland Cement Reservoir

El Paso's Hidden Lake

Good News on Open Space Acquisitions

There was one good piece of news that came as a result of last week's PSB meeting. During the discussion on stormwater and other budgets, I addressed the board and pointed out that, with the exception of the Palisades and a couple of other minor purchases, the portion of the stormwater fee set aside to purchase open space was being used for parks and ponds - shrubs and sod was the way I put it. (I had previously blogged about the issue HERE.) Having been on the Open Space committee and then Board for 5 years, I am well aware of this issue. The EPWU spokesperson would come to OSAB meetings and discuss EPWU interest in a piece of land - but it was always just talk. (That person btw was Rudy Valdez. He's a great guy and was only passing on information. My mentioning a spokesperson to the Board was not meant to be a criticism of that person just of the emptiness of the EPWU's message over 5 years.)

It turns out that the new person in charge of acquisitions at the EPWU is none other than Lupe Cuellar.  Now that's the good news! The conservation community can have confidence that Ms. Cuellar will be more diligent and focused on open space purchases.

There is a caveat of course. The mere announcement of interest in a section of private land can drive up the price. There not only has to be a willing seller but a seller willing to be reasonable and even civic-minded. 

When I voiced my concern/criticism at the PSB meeting, CEO Balliew did point out that negotiations in the past had not worked out not because of the EPWU but because of unwilling or unreasonable sellers. I'm sure that has been the case in many instances. However, five years of nothing except the Palisades and parks and ponds tells me that there has been a lack of focus and willingness on the part of the EPWU. After all, the political will in the City has been biased toward park ponds. The purchase of parks and ponds is something City reps can point to proudly. It's pork in El Paso. That money included shrubs and sod although Balliew mistakenly told the Board otherwise. I'm afraid that he left the impression with some of the more reactionary members that the EPWU was innocent regarding the slow pace of purchasing open space. On the other hand, the fact that some members wanted to know the reason for the slow pace reveals that they do want to see natural open space purchased. It will be helpful to keep asking the question. The proof, as I told John Balliew after the meeting, is in the pudding - with open space, with pipelines to the Rio Bosque and so forth. Talk is cheap.

It is true that the ordinance which created the 10% of stormwater money to buy natural open space (which has stormwater function) included the purchase of park ponds. It was the only way politically to pass the measure. However, it seems that reps continue to find ways to spend that money for park ponds. El Paso Engineer Alan Shubert let slip at a Council meeting not long ago that the City was looking at more land for park ponds. That was before he found himself overseeing the stadium project on behalf of the City. Of course, there was the Johnson Basin boondoggle - the purchase with open space money of a vacant lot with a paved asphalt parking lot. It has been decades since any natural arroyo existed in the area. It has long been residential land dominated by William Beaumont Hospital below a busy thoroughfare, Alabama Street. (Pacemaker bioengineer and PSB Chairman Schoephoerster [PSB has something to do with water not hearts - right?] said, you will recall, that it looked like natural open space to him. (See video HERE and more HERE and HERE.) God I hope Dean Schoephoerster had nothing to do with the pacemaker inside of me!)

Anyway - good news. Lupe Cuellar is in charge of open space acquisitions at the EPWU.

Speak Out and Show Up for Open Space

In their newsletter "At Lincoln House", the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy recently reported: "Based on the last several years of referendum voting, it appears most Americans are willing to pay for the acquisition of conservation land."

Cities such as Scottsdale and Cave Creek in Arizona are finding that they can tax to keep landscapes unfragmented, preserve wildlife, open space and cultural heritage. Read the recent Wall Street Journal article by Erica E. Phillips: In Scottsdale, a Quest to Keep the West Wild
Sprawling City Use Taxes, State Funds to Acquire and Preserve Open Lands.

Yet, here in El Paso, although we have a vehicle for preserving open space (10% of your stormwater fee), we squander it on park ponds and do nothing toward the purchase of land prioritized for preservation.

And here's the kicker: yesterday, after the PSB Committee meeting, I suggested to John Balliew, Christina Montoya (VP of Communications and Marketing at EPWU) and Rick Bonart that the Chair of the Open Space Committee be included in stormwater budget meetings. Nobody from OSAB attended this fall's budget meeting and I figured that they had just been ignored.  Ms. Montoya made the point that her office sent out all kinds of notices and announcements about the meeting. I know that she did because she is consistently great about informing the public and I got her notices. Dr. Bonart said that he personally informed the Chair of OSAB about the meeting and encouraged attendance. 

What do we have to do to acquire conservation land/open space? Show up and start pushing the open space priorities and program. I'm saying this to myself as well now too.

Catching Up: Stormwater Budget

Study this slide.

Note the $2.6 Million for park ponds. Read sod. Besides the acquistion of the Palisades and a smaller property, there have been no other purchases of natural open space - none from the list of priorities established by the Open Space Advisory Board. EPWU Stormwater officials have claimed in meeting after meeting that they are looking at land but have nothing to show for it except more money for sod and shrubs for park ponds.

When I suggested that the current OSAB members do not have the will to fight the trend to finance park ponds and not to purchase open space, a veteran observer agreed with me and added: "They [OSAB members] sit there while staff and the city attorney dictate to them.  They haven't said a thing to challenge the park pond funding."

Open Space Board and Democracy under Attack

Harold:

Well, either you're closing your eyes 

To a situation you do not wish to acknowledge

Or you are not aware of the caliber of disaster indicated

By the presence of sprawlers and their lackeys in our community.

Ya got trouble, my friend, right here, 

I say, trouble right here in Rio Grande City. 

Please Attend Wednesday's Blue Ribbon Meeting

The next meeting of Blue Ribbon Advisory Committee on Public Service Board (PSB) Land Management will be held on Wednesday, August 22^nd at 8:00 a.m. in the City Council Chambers. The meeting will be open and televised.  El Paso’s water future is the key issue. Do we want the PSB to continue to manage land deliberately as part of an overall water conservation effort or do we want to sell land quickly for development and sprawl?  Judy Ackerman has stated it best: “Please invite others to attend and encourage the termination of the “Blue Ribbon” committee.  The reason that the PSB exists is to remove politics from sales of city owned land.  The purpose of the “Blue-Ribbon” committee is to put politics back in land sales.”

Please visit the elpasonaturally post Update on Sad Blue Committee for more background.  EPWU Public Information Specialist, Martin Bartlett, has provided some strong bullet points for keeping PSB doing what it has been doing since 1952.  See the post, Why the PSB Should Continue to Manage City Land.

Elpasonaturally continues to call for making the preservation of land as natural open space in perpetuity as one of the reasons why land should be declared inexpedient by the PSB and set aside rather than put on the market. (A reasonable condition for declaring property inexpedient is its intrinsic value as open space.)  Here are a few more action items for City Council to take rather than forming a committee to hurry-up land sales:

1.       The City is using too much water for turf parks. ( 20% of this year’s river water!)  We need to limit turf parks by setting a limit on the municipal water supply available for turf parks to a max of 10% of the project river water per year.  Conservation of water requires a transition to natural open space and passive recreation.

2.       The City Council needs to get out of the relationship between the Open Space Advisory Board (OSAB) and PSB regarding spending the 10% of your stormwater fee for open space.  This is really a PSB budget item and City Council needs to stop draining those funds and PSB needs to stand up to Council.  

3.       An OSAB member needs to be allowed to participate in land negotiations conducted by the PSB on open space land purchases.

4.       And again, dissolve the Blue Ribbon Committee and start putting more time and effort into strategic planning (both PSB and the City working together) about our water future in light of global warming, water shortage and drought.

Low flow shower heads and house by house rainwater harvesting make sense and do make a difference locally – but they are just drops in the bucket compared to the overall water issues currently facing us. Marshall Carter-Tripp wrote to say:

“I attended the Rain Harvesting session today. [TecH20 workshop this past Saturday.]  Reasonably informative.   But I kept thinking that this is in the category of the deck chairs on the Titanic.  If we save and use some rainwater, fine, we can reduce our reliance on city water.   We personally don't have the storage capacity to live off the grid as it were.   And of course, as rainfall totals drop, where are we going?  If every new house in EP had to have harvesting capacity installed, even if we retrofitted every house in EP, would that help?  At 4500 gallons a year total from a roof, seems unlikely to keep the problem under control, especially if we continue the headlong expansion of the city. Low-flow toilets, efficient washers, Yada Yada.   Helpful but . . .

“That big gorilla over there in the corner is our totally wasteful and totally unsustainable agriculture, which cannot be fed by rainwater harvesting.  (Nor can all those new swimming pools going in around the City.) What we are doing now is promoting minor actions that make a small number of people feel that something important is being done while we ignore that gorilla and his twin, "how many people can live in the Paso del Norte region?  Have we already reached that number?  What happens in 2042?”

It is time to look more critically at our choices of water hungry crops, irrigation canals subject to evaporation, and a water district out of our control – and more out of our control since the number of people who can vote in Water Improvement District #1 was cut dramatically through legislation by State Senator José Rodriguez. WID Manager, Jesus “Chuy” Reyes, won’t answer questions about voting rights denied.

There are those who are more optimistic about El Paso’s water future. Dr. Phil Goodell, THE Dean of Geology and a hero of mine, believes El Paso with its desalinization plant and prospects for importing water will have water for “hundreds” of years even if that water is much more expensive. I suspect that the truth lies somewhere between the most pessimistic assumptions and centuries of time. Do read, Dr. Goodell’s email to me posted here. Whatever the case, for sure his optimism is yet another reason to let PSB continue to manage land and water conservation. Manage with more transparency for sure. Manage as part of a comprehensive El Paso strategy for its water future, definitely. And manage with more environmental/conservation experts on the Board and less tied to development and industry and less whose institutions benefit from PSB/EPWU largesse.

Finally, if you don’t believe that global warming, long-term drought and water shortage are issues, just turn on the news. A reader just pointed out that last winter the north rim of the Grand Canyon received eight inches of snow when the average is 142 inches! Here’s a quick read about drought impact including links to more information. Cut to the chase? Just go to the Drought Mitigation Center.

Open Space Advisory Board - 2012 Annual Report

Osab City Council Report 6-5-12