Kill this Vampire or Is It a Zombie?

At a special City Council meeting yesterday, Dr. Noe asked whether the 10% of stormwater money designated for open space could go to finance some projects around the city. He suggested that the money could be borrowed and paid back. Although Diana Drain wasn't mentioned, this was one of the specific projects that the Mayor wanted to address with the open space funds. The Mayor's old proposal which seemingly died on the vine and the recommendation of that proposal subsequently was rescinded by the Open Space Advisory Board.

Emma Acosta (recently I've been agreeing with her) said that voters had designated that 10% for open space and their vote should be respected. Paraphrasing Carl Robinson, he said that people vote on lots of things but it is no big deal to change that vote. The Mayor said that he might try to approach open space people again. 

Somebody kill this vampire. Or, is it a zombie that just keeps coming? To take the open space money for something for which is is not designated undermines that fund, the acquisition and preservation of open space, the stormwater utility and the Public Service Board.

Dr. Rick Bonart, a candidate for City Council District 1 and a former PSB member, suggests other ways to finance emergencies such as Diana Drain or flooding along Transmountain or I-10 and so forth:

1. If there are real emergencies John Balliew, CEO of EPWU, could pull from the O&M budget because there is elasticity there.

2. The increase in the stormwater fee should, via revenue bonds, be able to generate more that enough cash - a product of the recent rate increase.

3. Implementing a stormwater impact fee is more appropriate than diverting funds the public specifically voted on and decide to use as open space money. 

Dr. Bonart stated unequivocally: "This money [the 10% of the stormwater fee] should be used for genuine open space projects only and that's it.

By the way, HERE is the agenda for yesterday's special council meeting. The conversation drifted from the agenda to flood issues to funding issues to taking open space money. Obviously, until the Council gets the fact that voters (i.e., citizens - and, no, Mr. Robinson you cannot overturn a vote just because you don't like it) designated 10% of their stormwater fees for open space, they can't contemplate its use for something else. More importantly, until they value the preservation of open space, they will continue to contemplate using that money to finance their shortfalls.

Also by the way, there were only 2 citizens from the general public in attendance. Perhaps 30 or 40 staff members were there.

Are these special council meetings (which now seem to be more often) a means to get around public comment and participation? Another vampire. Or a zombie.

Open Space Should be Included in New Community Developments

Bird of Paradise blooms in Resler Canyon, a nature preserve managed by Frontera Land Alliance.

Over the past several years The Frontera Land Alliance has been working with Sumner Swaner (Utah State University; Swaner preserve and Eco Center; Swaner Design; American Institute of Certified Planners, etc.). Mr. Swaner was one of the expert practitioners that we asked to participate in a webinar to share his approach to large landscape conservation. The Franklin and Organ Mountains Conservation Cooperative hosted a webinar (June 2013) with experts from The Conservation Fund, the University of Utah Ecological Planning Center and the North Carolina Department of Natural Resources to learn about various approaches to community-based  landscape conservation.  

Mr. Swaner has shared a presentation that The Frontera Land Alliance feels would be of interest to all.  His findings state that there are two basic reasons that make open space so important. On one hand, there are many advantages to conserving and protecting open spaces, including physical, psychological, economic, and ecological gains. On the other hand, there are disadvantages to losing open spaces. Opportunities for exercise and for mental/emotional fulfillment are diminished. Aesthetic quality, habitat connectivity, and environmental conditions are degraded. Open space is important, therefore, both as a means of capitalizing on major benefits and of avoiding serious costs.

The open space connectedness survey, conducted by Mr. Swaner, consisted of 800 randomly selected people from seven states, who participated in phone or online interviews: approximately 115 participants each from California, Colorado, Georgia, Illinois, New York, Oregon, and West Virginia. They targeted specific counties within each state were targeted, in order to reach people living in a range of urban, rural, and suburban areas. 

The open space connectedness survey had three objectives. First, to determine the opinions and feelings of Americans regarding their connection to open space in their residential communities. Second, to confirm that, in addition to deriving physical and recreational benefits, Americans have a deep psychological connection with open space. Third, to determine Americans’ preferred methods of residential open space planning. The survey had two targeted research questions: 1) Is there a preference for development with a significant proportion of open space?   2) Is this preference so important that city planners need to integrate open space into their planning and subdivision regulations?

The open space connectedness survey showed that the majority of Americans place a high value on open space. More than 80% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed with these statements: “Open space is important to mental well-being,” and “Open space is an integral part of any community.”  Regardless of age, geographic location, urban or rural living conditions, and even political affiliation, people across the country feel that their community cannot do without open space, and that open space is important not only for exercise and recreation, but for mental and emotional health and rejuvenation. 

Americans are calling specifically for open space planning and development. Around 75% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed with these statements: “Open space should be automatically included in new community developments,” and “Real estate development and land conservation should occur together.” 

Similarly, around 60% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed with these statements: “I would prefer to have my same residence, but in a neighborhood that has large, shared open spaces,” and
“A lack of coherent planning of open space will prevent conservation.”  Residents quite clearly think that their cities should be taking active steps to protect the places they love.  

The Frontera Land Alliance is working with a wide variety of agencies ranging from local, state and federal to achieve these very goals. If you are interested in conserving your land whether it is urban or rural feel free to contact The Frontera Land Alliance at 915-351-8352. 

The Frontera Land Alliance
Janae Renaeud Field
915-351-8352
janae@Fronteralandalliance.org

Diversion of Open Space Funds May Now Be Dead Except for Park Ponds

Prior to the Mayor's deletion of item 13.2 from yesterday's City Council agenda, substantial pushback to the proposal began to show up especially from some members of City Council who either felt uninformed or feared the loss of money that they could tap into for future park ponds. There must have been considerable emailing back and forth among members during an discussion of an earlier agenda item. I'm privy to some of that.

Just a few minutes ago I sent an email message to the Mayor and Ms. Niland. Here is what I wrote:

"Mr. Mayor and Ms. Niland,

"It appears that there is substantial pushback to the proposal to divert up to $3.2 Million from open space funds for flood issues. I certainly understand your need to delete the item yesterday, Mr. Mayor. Given the pushback from some on City Council and substantial opposition to the proposal among many in the public, it may be best to just let this one die. I like "creative financing" but know that there are funds elsewhere to accomplish the same tasks. Additionally, the current PSB rate increase now just makes more sense. 

"I have been concerned that some see open space funds as just a means of buying "pretty" land. As you know, those funds are to purchase natural open space land that has stormwater function. In other words, those funds are meant for the health, safety and welfare of all persons in the City of El Paso. I have also been concerned that the open space funds will become just a "slush" fund for other projects. I know that you both do not want that to happen and I appreciated your willingness to place restrictions on the proposal. But given the failure of some to see that the funds are meant for the safety of El Pasoans and instead see them as a frivolous means of purchasing and conserving land for being simply "pretty", then the use of this money as a slush fund may become the rule and not the exception in spite of our best intentions.

"Of course, conserving land is critical given the scarcity of our most precious and needed commodity: water. Moreover, such conservation prevents the burden of higher property taxes for additional infrastructure, maintenance and services. Too much development on the edges of a town does not pay for itself but creates additional expenses for the city and the taxpayers. Infill projects such as the Northgate project which you approved yesterday and called "incredible for the city" do more than pay for themselves - they are indeed a boon for jobs.

"I certainly value and appreciate the leadership both of you are giving the city. Your theme that El Paso is open for business is so exciting and it is working. Jobs mean more revenue from sales tax and thus a way to alleviate the increasingly unbearable burden of property taxes. I am grateful to you for seeking my input. I hope that we can continue to work together on many other items. "Green" and "prosperity" go hand in hand. A resilient city needs both. You know that you can call on me at any time. 

"Sincerely and with all best wishes,


Jim Tolbert"

Let us hope that this is now a dead issue and move on to the more critical issues of water scarcity and land conservation. There is much to be done here and park ponds are not part of the solution. Those on Council who wish to take open fund money for park ponds are doing so against ordinance.

Let me quote Charlie Wakeem from an email he recently sent:

"No where in the Municipal Drainage System Ordinance of June 19, 2007 does it state that the 10% money could go for park ponds.  If that was the intent of council while you were there, Susie, then it should have been stated in the ordinance.  The ordinance specifically states, Section III (C) "Notwithstanding anything herein to be contrary and even to the extent such operation may constitute storm water maintenance, the city shall continue to be responsible for ... (iv) parks"."  Section III (D) "The Capital Plan shall identify stormwater infrastructure projects (including land acquisitions) which have the potential dual purposes of storm water management and preservation of the City’s open spaces, greenways, arroyos and wilderness areas in their natural state in accordance with the City’s Open Space Master Plan and the City’s Parks and Recreation Master Plan (“Green Projects”).  The Board shall allocate an amount equal to ten percent (10%) of the System’s annual drainage utility revenues for such Green Projects". [emphasis added]  There is nothing ambiguous about the ordinance.  If council wants to change the ordinance to include park ponds, they have the power to do so, but it wasn't what the community voted for when it endorsed the ordinance which established the Municipal Drainage System.


"I've always been in favor of park ponds where they are safe (i.e. shallow in grade and depth), but it's a Parks budget item, not the Storm Water Utility's.  Also, ponding areas should be planted with the use of native vegetation, which do not require watering and manicuring, as recommended in both the Parks and Open Space Master Plans."

I'll write more about all of this later.

Park Ponds? Really?

After my last post, I got this message from Charlie Wakeem who was the Chairman of the Open Space Board for the past 3 or 4 years and one of the architects of the open space and stormwater policies in El Paso - in fact he could be called the Dean of Conservation in our city - i.e., the man has mucho gravitas:


Hi Jim,

Once again, another good post.  I'd like to clarify something from it for you. Nowhere in the Municipal Drainage System Ordinance does it state that the 10% Open Space money could be used for the purchase of ponds or for park improvements (e.g. sod, turf & shrubs) to ponds.  I've read the ordinance over and over and over, and there's no other way to interpret it.  I admit I'm one of those who succumbed to city council's pork by not opposing the use of the 10% money for park ponds in their districts.  The following is a cut and paste of the actual ordinance.  I highlighted the important phrases and highlighted the most important phrases.  Show me, if you can, anywhere where it authorizes the use of the 10% money for the purchase of or improvements to park ponds.

Charlie

ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING THE MUNICIPAL DRAINAGE SYSTEM

 ORDINANCE  #O16668 - JUNE 19, 2007

     WHEREAS, the City has adopted an Open Space Master Plan which emphasizes open spaces and natural areas as a possible method to help manage storm water, reduce flooding risk and improve water quality;                                                                                    

SECTION III.
ESTABLISHING AND MANAGEMENT OF THE SYSTEM

B.  The Board [PSB] shall cause to be prepared a Master Stormwater Management Plan (“Stormwater Plan”) which shall be approved by the City Council.  In developing the Stormwater Plan the Board shall take into account the use of open space as natural drainage and to extent reasonably possible preserve the City’s open spaces, greenways, arroyos and wilderness areas in their natural state as a means to assist in the management of storm water and in accordance with the City’s Open Space Master Plan.

C.  Notwithstanding anything herein to be contrary and even to the extent such operation may constitute storm water maintenance, the City shall continue to be responsible for … (iv) parks.


D.  The General Manager shall bring to the Board annually a Stormwater Capital Improvement Plan (the “Capital Plan”) for approval which shall include both short and long term objectives.  To assure compliance with the Stormwater Plan the City’s Flood Plain Administrator shall review the proposed Capital Plan prior to its presentation to the board.  The Capital Plan shall, to the extent reasonably possible, include the use and maintenance of arroyos and other natural drainage drainage systems as a means to manage stormwater and otherwise take into account environmental best practices in the construction of any stormwater infrastructure.  The Capital Plan shall identify stormwater infrastructure projects (including land acquisitions) which have the potential dual purposes of stormwater management and preservation of the City’s open spaces, greenways, arroyos and wilderness areas in their natural state in accordance with the City’s Open Space Master Plan and the City’s Parks and Recreation Master Plan (“Green Projects”).  The Board shall allocate an amount equal to ten percent (10%) of the System’s annual drainage utility revenues for such Green Projects. 

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.

The Bosque and Untied Blue Ribbons

Begin the countdown: T minus Eight days until the beginning of the 2012 PSB Strategic Planning meetings on Thursday and Friday, October 11^th and 12^th at the TecH20 Center starting at 8 a.m. each morning. Environmental/Conservation community members: Big Red Circles on your calendars for these upcoming days.  PSB/EPWU: extra coffee and Krispy Kremes, s’il vous plait.

One item certain to be on the Strategic Planning agenda – water for the Rio Bosque. Let’s do some catching up since elpasonaturally reported some dramatic revelations at the September PSB meeting. Last week EPWU Vice President, John Balliew, briefed Open Space Advisory Board members about the Rio Bosque and set the record straight. In summary, here are the facts:

1.       The water which the Bustamante plant currently empties into the Riverside canal (or drain) is slightly treated effluent which is permitted by the TCEQ.

2.       That water is returned to the Water Improvement District without charge by conditions set in the Rio Grande Project Implementing Contract among the Bureau of Reclamation, the WID, and the PSB.

3.       One strategy for getting water to the Bosque was to use the Bosque as part of a larger water treatment scheme – the multi-million dollar seeming Rube Goldberg devised by Malcolm Pirnie. That was “Plan A”. Unfortunately, salts and metals in the Bosque soil would have added additional long-term expenses to water treatment.

4.       Thus “Plan B” created by Balliew – a $440,000 pipeline to the Bosque with several outlets to spread the water more evenly. Construction could begin soon.  But what kind of water would flow through the pipe?

5.       Slightly treated effluent is permitted to be returned to the river. It would not be permissible to use this water directly on the Bosque. Permissible water must be purple pipe quality – reclaimed water, i.e., effluent that has been filtered and re-disinfected.

6.       New problem: by the rules and regulations of bond covenants, our water utility would have to sell the water to the Bosque as it does to other City’s parks. There is some debate here, but an easy solution would be to transfer the Bosque from the City inventory to the PSB inventory. If there are measures (say a conservation easement) which guarantee that the Bosque would remain an educational/research wetland preserve with UTEP as a partner, that transfer should be attractive to conservationists.

Elpasonaturally doesn’t just see light at the end of the tunnel  - but sunrise on the wetland alive with the melodies of many merry species of birds. One can even begin to hear the Mormon Tabernacle Choir singing Handel’s Hallelujah Chorus.

What’s driving water to the Bosque? The question is better asked “Who’s driving water to the Bosque?” Elpasonaturally has learned through the engineering grapevine that John Balliew has been pushing for a solution and is making it happen. Bringing much needed water to the Bosque efficiently, is not just a matter of turning a valve. The question is whether there can still be a temporary solution that can bring water there now and relieve John Sproul from his Sisythusian task of hauling water by truck day after day. What’s in it for El Paso if Balliew succeeds – an $18Million eco-tourist bonanza.

One other little tidbit: the EPWU person most trusted by conservation groups: John Balliew.

Joint Resolution Article 1 Revision Recommended

Click on title or icon on bottom right-hand corner to enlarge.

One last matter to catch up on – the Mayor’s Blue Ribbon Committee, now untied from their task since a joint meeting of the City Council and PSB last week approved their proposals. Just read the Chris Roberts EP Times story, Rules for PSB land sales clarified. In essence there is really not much difference between what was and what will be. The PSB will continue to determine when land is inexpedient and can be sold. Sections “D” and “E” of the new provision spell out more specific goals and guidelines for determining inexpediency.  Of importance to conservationists are two provisions. In the provision for land sales of more than 25 acres (Item “C” in the revised provision), “open space” is defined as one of the public facilities that the PSB must transfer to the City without cost. This is huge. Moreover, in Item “D” “preserving open spaces and critical arroyos” is listed as a goal when considering land sale opportunities.  Elpasonaturally believes that PSB Chairman and Blue Ribbon member, Ed Escudero, was very helpful in adding this important verbiage. Making open space a criteria for inexpediency all by itself would have been the giant leap – but this one small step should be appreciated by El Pasoans who cherish their natural heritage.

You can view the slideshow Recommendations from the City of El Paso Advisory Committee on PSB Land Management presented to the joint meeting of the City Council and PSB last Wednesday.

Next to finally for this e-letter: there have been expressions of optimism about our ongoing water supply. Caution may be the better attitude. Please read some thoughts by PSB member (and the doctor of Copernicus, my Flame Point Siamese), Dr. Rick Bonart.

And finally, finally: fall weather is perfect for hiking, mountain biking, climbing, planting and just getting outdoors. There are so many great, organized hikes now. Celebration of Our Mountains is in full swing. Also check out El Paso Hiking Group, Guadalupe Mountains National Park Meetup Group,  Las Cruces & El Paso Adventurists, and Peak Fitness Challenge. See the Franklin Mountains State Park October hiking and events schedule.  Scenic Drive is open to all hikers, bicyclists, walkers, strollers (with attached parent), even Chihuahuas (with attached human) every Sunday from 6 to 11 a.m.  One not-to-miss educational lecture this week: Dr. Paul Hyder will be talking about rattlesnakes on Thursday, October 4^th, at 6:15ish (following a Master Naturalist chapter meeting) at the El Paso Garden Center, 3105 Grant Avenue. (Map).  And take an arroyo walk, visit archaeological sites and buy native plants for your garden at Keystone Heritage Park this Saturday, October 6^th.

EPWU Responds to Another Big, Ugly Pond

EPWU Vice President John Balliew responded to my questions regarding the destruction of vegetation and habitat at a detention pond off of Scenic Drive. He wrote:

"In this case, the dam and the area behind the dam had not been maintained in many years if ever. The outlet where the controlled release of water is supposed to occur was completely covered by several feet of soil. In order to remedy that situation, we built access road, desilted the bottom and filled some eroded areas on the dam slope. We did not disturb the remaining sides of the area behind the pond. We recognize it is highly visible from scenic drive, but it is a high dam and the work had to be done. We do not plan on re- vegetating, but we will not again disturb vegetation on the bottom until sufficient fill comes in to require removal. Unfortunately, we cannot allow shrubs and trees on the dam slope as this can provide a pathway for water flow and subsequent dam failure and we would be cited by either TCEQ or the Corps of Engineers (as appropriate) during inspection and enforcement.

Keeping the dam slopes free from shrubs and trees and keeping the outlet free flowing is critical to maintaining the safety of the public below the dam. As a note, the five ponds that we desilted last year were not re-vegetated yet are beginning to recover. We are working two more near Scenic Drive but those will be disturbed less and will be a little less visible."

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers agrees that what EPWU is doing would likely be authorized under Nationwide Permit 3 - Maintenance. In addition, UTEP Engineering Professor John Walton says that Balliew is being reasonable.

Erosion control is still a concern as well as being more pro active re-seeding the area. Elpasonaturally still wonders whether planning remediation ahead, even if no agency requires it, wouldn't be the way to go.

Another Big, Ugly Pit

Mounds of dirt wait to be hauled out of EPWU moonscaped retention pond along Scenic Drive

A little over two years ago members of the Newman Park Neighborhood Association met with top officials of El Paso Water Utilities. Their concern was the planned "clean-up" of the Altura detention pond. Neighbors wanted assurances that trees and other native vegetation would be preserved as much as possible. The EPWU corporate brass promised that trees would be preserved and only some vegetation would be removed to create a truck lane into the pond. When the project was done, neighbors were stunned to see a moonscape. Trees and other vegetation all around the pond had been scraped, bulldozed and hauled off.

Now EPWU is finishing work on another retention pond off the side of Scenic Drive. Same thing: trees and other vegetation have been scraped, bulldozed and hauled off. A road from a lower reservoir was cut into the hillside and loose asphalt was spread on it to make it easier for trucks to haul off the sand. A moonscape replaces the flora and fauna - a moonscape which is not exactly what the "scenic" in Scenic Sunday is all about.

Certainly, work must be done to clean out the ponds to prevent massive stormwater runoff. However, can it not be done in such a way so that native plants and wildlife are not destroyed and El Pasoans and their guests are not looking at just one more big ugly pit? A citizen raised the issue of the Scenic Drive pond at an LRC meeting yesterday in the context of a new grading ordinance. City Engineer Alan Shubert explained that the reality is that utility is not bound by the grading ordinances. Why not?

These great big pits attract one thing: plastic bags and other litter. Elpasonaturally will be keeping an eye out for the "re-vegetation" of this storm pit with plastic and glass debris and will publish the pictures.

The bigger question is the need for a PSB policy to remediate land for erosion control, restoration of native plants and habitat and, in many instances, rainwater harvesting. As Professor John Walton said at Monday's stakeholders meeting on Arroyo 41A in his lecture ("Reducing Stormwater Costs with Low Impact Designs"): "Current stormwater engineering practices in El Paso are based primarily on dated designs from different climates and landscapes."

One of the more interesting revelations that came out of EPWU VP of Operations John Balliew's presentation at the stakeholders meeting is that PSB has a land management plan of selling land and preserving only that land necessary for stormwater management. They want to get the maximum dollar amount that they can for their land. (All of this probably explains their resistance to any kind of downzoning in an effort to preserve natural open space.) After all, they will need lots of money to sustain what is ultimately unsustainable: the water that they mine in the bolsons. El Paso is just getting too large, too fast and it appears that they are managing the demand on water by making sure that they get more money in the bank with land sales. Of course, they get the money along with encouraging sprawl at the same time. This raises more questions: besides desalinization (which buys us a few decades), is anyone at EPWU looking at rainwater harvesting and stormwater practices more relevant to our climate and landscape?

(Bill Addington, a member of the Open Space Advisory Board, made a good point at the last meeting: sprawl can be limited just by refusing to meter. Build all you like . . . you just won't get hooked up to the water supply. After s recent hike through the lower northwest arroyos, we (the Sunrise Hikers) returned to our cars by way of an expensive new development full of empty houses and those ominous signs that say "Corporate Owned" - i.e., foreclosed upon. And we want to encourage more sprawl by controlling an arroyo, 41A, in the only manner that El Paso engineers seem to know - single channel and concrete it and build one huge retention pond that will forever alter the arroyo?)

New sign at Palisades reveals minimal open space land use policy. Click on image to enlarge and read.

Sooner or later, PSB will have to come up with a realistic land management policy for its open space that takes into account practices beyond just scraping huge pits into the ground and preserving land for developers to bid on while destroying vegetation and wildlife - a plan that optimizes attractions to eco-tourism and preserves natural beauty and open space and enforces laws against illegal dumping - something PSB doesn't do now because the land's only real value to them seems to be the value it will have to future sprawlers.

El Paso and El Pasoans Deserve the Best

Public Service Board member, Dr. Rick Bonart, copied me on an email this morning to Mr. Ed Archuleta, the President and CEO of the El Paso Water Utilities Public Service Board. The context for Rick's email was the El Paso Times positive story this morning about the Palisades. He makes the point that having lovely open space areas for recreation such as the Palisades is more than just a need - it is a must and that the Public Service Board should take the lead. El Paso has long been hampered by a mindset that we don't deserve the best of amenities. The attitude is changing . . . but there still seems to be resistance.

Here is the text of Dr. Bonart's message:

To all,

I was very happy to see the article in today's paper regarding the Palisades.

Ultimately, I hope we share a common goal: to provide El Pasoans with usable open space and associated amenities like those I've experience in other cities.

The black letter of the law allows the 10% storm water funds to be spent on facilities, trails, etc. as long as there is a storm water nexus. 'The Capital Plan shall identify storm water infrastructure projects ( including land acquisitions) which may have the potential dual purposes of stormwater management and preservation of the City’s open spaces . . . '

Since inception, the PSB has been charged with land management. As we purchase open space and accept open space easements, we need to manage these properties for their intended purpose. Considering cost, legislative effort, and location, it is unlikely that every parcel (if any) of acquired open space will be suitable for transfer to the State Park. Fallow lands have recreational value and as fiduciaries we must maximize those opportunities.

We have all the tools at hand. We have the money! The proposed projects are fully vetted. Maintenance of the trails will be done by the users who created and currently groom them. Operation & Maintenance of correctly designed facilities will be miniscule in the context of our other responsibilities.

El Paso has long suffered from a pathologic self deprecating attitude. Our Mantra: 'We are a poor community that can't afford . . .'

Unfortunately, I feel some resistance inches from the goal [" to provide El Pasoans with usable open space and associated amenities . . . "]

Perhaps it's fear of change or fear of success?

This is not just an opportunity - it's a need for the PSB to lead and allow our community to enjoy some long overdue treats.

It's OK we deserve it.

Please pass this along.

Rick

Signage at the Lost Dog Wash Trail is nicely designed

What are examples of some recreational treats? Moab, Utah provides areas not only for mountain bikers but for 4 wheelers. The Lost Dog Wash Trail of Scottsdale, Arizona is a well-maintained and signed open space used for recreation.

The Summerlin Community in Las Vegas shows that homes can be built and beautiful natural open space can be kept and enjoyed rather than turning magnificent arroyos into concrete channels awaiting the vandalism of taggers. (Definitely take time to visit the Summerlin web site and "take the tours".)

Dr. Bonart is right. El Pasoans deserve the very best. The significance of the Palisades is that we stand on the verge of a new age if we can just get beyond the resistance of a few.

More Franklin Mountains Land to Go to Open Space?

Click to enlarge

It seems that owners of 26 acres of land west of Scenic Drive on the east side of the mountain and another 623 acres further north near Hondo Pass are for sale and the owners have indicated that they would prefer to see the land be preserved as open space rather than be developed. However, they have indicated that they need to make a decision soon.

District 2 Representative Susie Byrd is posting this item to the executive session agenda of City Council on February 9, 2010:

Discussion and action on directing staff to negotiate for parcels on the east side of the mountain owned by Daniel T. Knapp, R.E. Knapp, Palo Verde Properties, R.E. and R.A. Knapp for the purpose of open space preservation.

City Council meets in executive session from 8:30 until 9:00 and then goes into public session at 9:30. At that time public comment is invited. Representative Byrd is asking for people to speak in support of preserving this land. If you can't be present at City Council, then she asks that you email her with your statements of support.

People who wish to speak must sign-up to do so. You can sign-up online.

In an email earlier today to Lynn Coyle, President of the Newman Park Neighborhood Association, Julie Rutledge, President of the Manhattan Heights Neighborhood Association, and myself, Rep. Byrd wrote:

I wanted to let you know about an item that I posted with Rep. Robinson on Tuesday's council agenda during Executive Session. There are 26 acres of land available for sale west of Scenic Drive between Wheeling and Savannah [see map posted above]. You have probably seen the For Sale sign. Ideally, I would like to see that land preserved as part of the Franklin State Park. My sense is that most people would agree and would not like to see it developed. The owners would like to see it go to that purpose also but they are paying taxes on the land and need to make some decisions about it soon. I think we might have an option where we could do some sort of short term arrangement with them (a lease or an option) that would allow us a little bit of time to go make a case to the State to buy it. I'm going to ask council to authorize staff to begin negotiating with the property owners to do this.

It would be great to get letters of support to preserve the land for open space . . . “ I would need all of this by Monday though. If you can't have a formal vote on this, can you request that individuals who are supportive email me a note of support?

Thanks. Let me know if you have any questions and if this is something that you might be able to do.

Susie

City Council Representative, District 2

www.notesfromdistrict2.blogspot.com

City Council Creates new Open Space Advisory Board

At their regular meeting yesterday and by a 7 to 1 vote, the El Paso City Council created a new Open Space Advisory Board. Currently there is an Open Space sub-committee of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board. Beginning with a retreat attended by some committee members at the end of January, a proposal was slowly formed to create a separate advisory board appointed by the Mayor and Council in order to focus additional attention on open space.

The Open Space Master Plan (Toward a Bright Future) is now over two years old. It recommended that several items be implemented in the first six months after its acceptance by Council. Not until PSB began formulating a Stormwater Master Plan this past fall were any of these recommendations even discussed. Why the delay to implement? Open Space was a sub-committee of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and would report to that Board - a cumbersome group of 19 individuals most of whom were interested in neighborhood issues. If a suggestion did get out of the Advisory Board, it still had to go before a Legislative Review Committee of the City Council before reaching City Council itself. (By the way, Council also created yesterday a new nine-member Board of Parks and Recreation.)

Another reason for the delay has been the inability of the Open space sub-committee to overcome the departmental layers of the city bureaucracy: Developmental Services, Parks and Recreation, Planning, and so forth.

With a new Advisory Board that works within the Parks and Recreation Department and reports directly to City Council, the Master Plan can begin to be implemented in a more timely fashion. The creation of the new Board removes levels of bureaucracy - something Representative Holguin didn't understand in spite of a chart created by Dr. Rick Bonart that shows the simpler pathway from Board to Council. (Holguin was the lone "no" vote against the proposal.)

The new ordinance states clearly that one of the board's duties will be to "provide recommendations on the implementation of 'Towards a Bright Future: A Green Infrastructure Plan for El Paso, Texas', commonly referred to as the Open Space Master Plan."

A Stormwater Engineer of the El Paso Water Utilities Public Service Board shall be an ex-officio member of the Council - an important ingredient again in implementing the plan. Moreover, the Board will provide input to the Mayor and Council on "legislative matters pertaining to open space submitted to the board by the director of the Department of Parks and Recreation, the director of the Developmental Services Department, the Chief Executive Officer of the Public Service Board, the director of the Economic Development Department and the City Flood Plain Administrator or their designees."

Implementing the Open Space plan not only preserves and protects huge areas of the El Paso environment, it also will help to control sprawl. Similar to Boulder's decades old "blue line", the creation of open space will help the City better manage growth. Such management can lead to more infill so that developers will do more to improve not just vacant areas in El Paso but possibly the most blighted areas as well.

El Paso is certainly on the right path and that was further demonstrated by a Trail Master Plan Citizens' Group organized by Shamori Whitt, the City's Open Space, Trails and Parks Coordinator. The group met last night for three hours and helped to identify hike and bike trails around the City for preservation. Attending the meeting was Jared Mendoza of the Engineering Traffic Division. He is helping to make El Paso a more walkable community.

Open space, walkability, ecotourism, outdoor recreation - these are key terms for El Paso's future. City Council took a big step into that future by creating an independent Open Space Advisory Board.